AI: Rough Terrain Immobilization

[RERomine]

Do AI units face the same risk of immobilization in rough terrain and soft sand as the player does?

[narwan]

Yes, but the AI will tend to avoid getting units stuck in such terrain (by moving slowly or avoiding the hex altogether).

Narwan

[RERomine]

Getting immobilized or slowing down both work for me. The AI has to cross a large wadi to get to me and it's pretty rough. Lots of Matilda II tanks (50+) and I was hoping to get time to work on them at a distance or even better, have some get stuck to narrow the odds some.

[DRG]

They will unless you have "Breakdown" set to OFF in preferences.

Don

[RERomine]

They will unless you have "Breakdown" set to OFF in preferences.

Don

I figure it's ON because I have an ammo truck stuck in soft sand.

[PanzerBob]

Soft sand has got to be the bain of desert warfare, I've had more vehicles stuck in the stuff tahn I care to remember! :hurt:

Bob out :D

[RERomine]

The AI must have been real careful because I didn't see any stuck in the post game review.

[iCaMpWiThAWP]

The AI must have been real careful because I didn't see any stuck in the post game review.
They avoid these hexes, or move slow on them, also, to cross Rough and sand is like to gamble, you can win...or lose...

[RERomine]

The AI must have been real careful because I didn't see any stuck in the post game review.
They avoid these hexes, or move slow on them, also, to cross Rough and sand is like to gamble, you can win...or lose...

In this case, there didn't appear to be a risk free way around them. It looked like a dry river bed in the desert, for lack of something else to call it. Basically, it was three hexes wide with rough on the sides and a rough slope in the middle. It twisted from the top of the map South two thirds of the way down and then angled back to the Southeast. It didn't quite come all the way to the bottom of the map.

That said, I didn't check it for safe crossing points because I didn't need to cross it. It wouldn't have altered my deployment for the delay. People might evaluate avenues of approach, but I think the AI deploys first and then takes the fastest and most direct route to the objectives. There is no basic forethought apparent in deployment with respect to the avenues of approach by the AI.

Before I have developers coming after me with tar and feathers, I should add that I wouldn't expect the AI to worry about avenues of approach during deployment. While it might be possible to create a program that employs planning and tactics like Rommel or Patton, it would probably have to run on a mainframe system because of all the horse power it would need. It's not practical to program for everything, since it's a game. I'm just pleased to seem improvements over this version compared to other and earlier versions available.

[Mobhack]

The AI must have been real careful because I didn't see any stuck in the post game review.
They avoid these hexes, or move slow on them, also, to cross Rough and sand is like to gamble, you can win...or lose...

In this case, there didn't appear to be a risk free way around them. It looked like a dry river bed in the desert, for lack of something else to call it. Basically, it was three hexes wide with rough on the sides and a rough slope in the middle. It twisted from the top of the map South two thirds of the way down and then angled back to the Southeast. It didn't quite come all the way to the bottom of the map.


That dried up rough river bed terrain feature is called a "Wadi", and was one of our earlier landscape creations.


That said, I didn't check it for safe crossing points because I didn't need to cross it. It wouldn't have altered my deployment for the delay. People might evaluate avenues of approach, but I think the AI deploys first and then takes the fastest and most direct route to the objectives. There is no basic forethought apparent in deployment with respect to the avenues of approach by the AI.

Before I have developers coming after me with tar and feathers, I should add that I wouldn't expect the AI to worry about avenues of approach during deployment. While it might be possible to create a program that employs planning and tactics like Rommel or Patton, it would probably have to run on a mainframe system because of all the horse power it would need. It's not practical to program for everything, since it's a game. I'm just pleased to seem improvements over this version compared to other and earlier versions available.

The Camo AI does evaluate the line of approach a little. It will try to utilise paths that avoid bad going. It will also try not to run full-tilt into sticking terrain should it need to go across it but to try to only move a hex or so into same at its move start for reduced sticking chance.

It will also try to go deep and come in from behind your flank, sometimes. I have had panzer 3s and T34 do that, usually on thick woods maps. But more noticeable in MBT where the AI has access to e.g. BMP and T64, I have had it roll up the artillery park in my rear zone when a flank was left unguarded.

The original SSI code was however a simple case of a horde of "tin lemmings" charging down the objectives as fast as possible, and the deployment for the attack was a predictable "Greek Phalanx" lined up in the middle 2/3 of the map just a couple of hexes behind the AI deployment line, for the most part.

Cheers
Andy

[RERomine]

That dried up rough river bed terrain feature is called a "Wadi", and was one of our earlier landscape creations.



Cool, we are on the same wave length then, because I referred to it as a wadi earlier in the thread :)



The Camo AI does evaluate the line of approach a little. It will try to utilise paths that avoid bad going. It will also try not to run full-tilt into sticking terrain should it need to go across it but to try to only move a hex or so into same at its move start for reduced sticking chance.

It will also try to go deep and come in from behind your flank, sometimes. I have had panzer 3s and T34 do that, usually on thick woods maps. But more noticeable in MBT where the AI has access to e.g. BMP and T64, I have had it roll up the artillery park in my rear zone when a flank was left unguarded.

The original SSI code was however a simple case of a horde of "tin lemmings" charging down the objectives as fast as possible, and the deployment for the attack was a predictable "Greek Phalanx" lined up in the middle 2/3 of the map just a couple of hexes behind the AI deployment line, for the most part.

Cheers
Andy

Tactically, it is much better than earlier versions of the code. Deployment is much better than it use to be. I remember I knew pretty much were I could lob artillery barrages and inflict heavy enemy casualties before even making contact. You pretty much described the AI assaults and advances to a tee. AI artillery would never counter-battery on-board artillery. Defense deployment used by the AI was very predictable. Bunkers, forts, pillboxes, etc., always pointed forward and placement was often pointless.

Now, the AI launches flanking attacks, defenses are more unpredictable, artillery fires counter-battery and I've yet to find a fortification buried deep in a forest defending nothing by trees. The sprinkling of mines on assaults is annoyingly devious.

In general, I ask questions because there are people who could give me the answer quicker than I could figure it out myself.

[PanzerBob]

When studying tactics there are NO stupid questions! As a Commander working in a vacuum, you tend to get into ruts so to speak. I have found this to be so true when I got back into PBEM, I went into battle using my usual tactics and strategies and got my :censor: handed to me, but, and no pun intended, I started to learn all over again. This is part of the reason I've never gotten bored of this game. AND Part of the reason we have this Forum to discuss these things. A good Commander always learns and always uses his or her's resources. IMHO

Bob out

[RERomine]

Quite true. Playing the AI and people are too very different games. This version of SP keeps me more honest than older versions. My artillery has to move or risk incoming mail. In my current battle, I move my truck mounted 88s every turn. I just have to remember where I fired from previously, which gets to be a problem :confused:

[gila]

Speaking of tough terrain,
Has anyone started a campaign as US?
Starting in the aleutians there is almost noway to use wheeled or tracked vehicles they get stuck in the swamp!or the low gullies between hills.
Iv'e tried many times always the same.:(
Next time i will go with grunts and patrol only i just want to get them!

[RERomine]

I haven't tried the US in the Aleutians, but have a nice screen shot of some AI British tanks moving very successfully through a swamp.

[Moon Pine]

Just remenber the AI tanks always ran in and got immoblized by its own mine field in WinSPWW2.

[gila]

I haven't tried the US in the Aleutians, but have a nice screen shot of some AI British tanks moving very successfully through a swamp.

I'm a big fan of the M3A1 Stuart fast and a good infantry support tank,the trouble is i can't get them close enough!
Without modifying the battlefield to the point of not being realistic.And i wouldn't want to take the realism away:angel
One point, i start out with a small core of 250 witch gives me 2 of them and maybe 6 scout patrols the Stuarts get stuck in the muck that is the terrain of the Aleutians,but i like to start small and build from there.

[RERomine]

I'm a big fan of the M3A1 Stuart fast and a good infantry support tank,the trouble is i can't get them close enough!
Without modifying the battlefield to the point of not being realistic.And i wouldn't want to take the realism away:angel
One point, i start out with a small core of 250 witch gives me 2 of them and maybe 6 scout patrols the Stuarts get stuck in the muck that is the terrain of the Aleutians,but i like to start small and build from there.

Are any ways to move your tanks and keep them out of the swamps? The AI might be able to pull off running tanks through swamps, but I wouldn't want to give it a try.

[gila]

I'm a big fan of the M3A1 Stuart fast and a good infantry support tank,the trouble is i can't get them close enough!
Without modifying the battlefield to the point of not being realistic.And i wouldn't want to take the realism away:angel
One point, i start out with a small core of 250 witch gives me 2 of them and maybe 6 scout patrols the Stuarts get stuck in the muck that is the terrain of the Aleutians,but i like to start small and build from there.

Are any ways to move your tanks and keep them out of the swamps? The AI might be able to pull off running tanks through swamps, but I wouldn't want to give it a try.

There can be ways, but alot like threading a needle.I'm not talking about obvious
swamps,no the little gullies between levels and hills.
Just finding your way through the fracking maze ruins the attack strategy.
And invariably my lttle Stuarts who might turn the the tide get stuck with no field of fire.
But, I've read, the Aleutians in May is wet marshy and muddy if not all the time.
Not good ground for either tracked or wheeled vehicles in the aleutian soft soil.
That's realism, ohh! the pain!
I guess spending 250 on foot units might be slow but necessary.
Remember trying to keep core force low so as not let AI have too much artillery or air power.

You should give it a try to see what i'm talking about.

[DRG]

Just remenber the AI tanks always ran in and got immoblized by its own mine field in WinSPWW2.

Really ?

Any specific examples to cite ?

A save game or two to provide us ?

Mines are only provided to the defender in assaults so how do AI tanks in the defence run into their own minefields where virtually all minefields are in front of the Victory hexes which , if taken by the human player, would be the only reason AI tanks would move from prepared defensive positions?

Don

[RERomine]

Just remenber the AI tanks always ran in and got immoblized by its own mine field in WinSPWW2.

Really ?

Any specific examples to cite ?

A save game or two to provide us ?

Mines are only provided to the defender in assaults so how do AI tanks in the defence run into their own minefields where virtually all minefields are in front of the Victory hexes which , if taken by the human player, would be the only reason AI tanks would move from prepared defensive positions?

Don

I'll keep my eye open for this and send a save when I come up with one, because I've seen it too. The AI dashed two tanks out during while on the defense. This was before contact was even made. My scouts spotted both on the way. One cleared the minefield, but one got immobilized. I finished it with artillery.

On the bright side for the AI, that little dash really disrupted my assault. The tank that cleared the minefield was heading toward my column. lead by half-tracks, and my tanks hadn't hit the LD yet. I diverted my column around the oncoming tank and sent tanks forward to engage it. It exchanged a few shots with my tanks and then retreated some. My column resumed moving forward when the AI tank moved up again. I finally took it out, but it was a real pain. It delayed my assault by 10 turns.

I also made reference to the AI advancing out of prepared positions on the "Core Assault" thread. Maybe they should stay put, but they sure as heck are taking off before victory hexes are captured.

[Mobhack]

The AI will very occasionally do a mini-counter attack even if no V-hexes are taken, usually with armour. It is designed to keep the attacker on his toes, and has been there since the MSDOS version of this game.

It happened to me a couple of days ago, when my British were advancing on the Italians. A platoon of M13/40 advanced along the bottom flank and I had to recall the forces there into cover (A FOO and a few scout cars) until an A10 platoon could be diverted from the main effort to deal with them.

Cheers
Andy

[DRG]

Yes, I had forgotten about that.

It was the "AI tanks always ran in and got immoblized by its own mine field" in the orginal complaint that got me going. AI tanks do not "always" immobilize themselves on their own mines


Don

[RERomine]

Yes, I had forgotten about that.

It was the "AI tanks always ran in and got immoblized by its own mine field" in the orginal complaint that got me going. AI tanks do not "always" immobilize themselves on their own mines


Don

No, not always. In that dash at me, one tank got immobilized and one got through just fine. Life would have been easier if it had gotten immobilized. A third tank stopped at the minefield line, behind the immobilized tank, and didn't proceed through it. The third tank ran away when I dropped artillery on the immobilized tank and killed it.