SPWW2 handicaps vs AI
 

Same poll for SPWW2 (my settings are different for this game):


Unused handicaps (things I could do that the computer cannot reciprocate).
----------------
Arty gold spots.
Fire filtering.
Setting engagement range using Y.
Create smoke in hex manually (I still use indirect arty smoke).
Area fire. This is OP IMHO. Maybe use triple ammo each shot (say if you have 30 units of ammo and run out after 10 fires)?
Covering to break contact (w key).
Backing up (8 key).


Handicaps I use against the AI.
----------------
Bailing crew. Stuck veteran units in danger of being overrun always get this treatment when safe to do so.
Reloading unit's ammunition. Some "fun" units don't come with enough ammo to party, the Italian SP 90mm comes to mind. I like the realism of limited ammo, not complaining :-).
Adjusting arty fire instead of always replotting.
Selectively firing weapons.


Handicaps I give the AI to use against me.
----------------
Sometimes I will buy units I don't use to give the AI a boost when they delay/defend.


Also, note:
I never give them stat buffs; I always keep everything at 100% but set the initial campaign buy at 65k.

Re: SPWW2 handicaps vs AI
 

Very minor boost if they are defending they get 1 point for every 3 you spend.

Re: SPWW2 handicaps vs AI
 

Well,the first thing comes to mind is area fire(z-fire in sp speak)
Imo as the AI will never use this ever,you should limit it to ONLY use if fired upon from an suspected location, to suppress or locate the hostile unit.
What i mean is if you z-fire on a suspected location they sometimes will reveal themselves if they happen to change stance.
That said,
I think Excessive z-fire against AI, is very gamey tactic and a major boost to human and in also PBEM.

Re: SPWW2 handicaps vs AI
 

Z fire is something I hardly ever find myself using, even if I wrote the code for it.

Nor do I fire smoke all that much other than self-protection smoke dischargers.

From what I gather, some folks go crazy with both Z-fire and choke the map with smoke. The answer to that is - learn limit yourself <G!>. If it's a PBEM opponent - have a discussion with him, if it is yourself, then try getting by with less, because you can.

Re: SPWW2 handicaps vs AI
 

I fail to understand the condemnation with z-fire. Is it just against players who recon-by-fire every tree line, hill or building they encounter?
It is the ability to fire on something without it being spotted that set SP apart from the other games and made me a lifetime fan back in the DOS days.

Re: SPWW2 handicaps vs AI
 

Because Z-fire/Area-fire is sort of an instantaneous artillery barrage: the volume of fire is big and instant, despite the firer not being artillery units at all. I mean, even normal artillery units usually don't have such rapid-reaction; now we're talking about normal infantry units with small arms, yet the suppression they create is equal if not worse than normal artillery fires, with all the benefit of being instantaneous.

But for me, the worst thing is this: 1st Platoon is encountering enemy units, with direct LOS and direct fire; but suddenly 2nd Platoon across the hedgerows and forests, probably half a kilometer away, without direct LOS to those enemy units (in real-life, probably wouldn't even know there's enemy there!) suddenly opens a concentrated fire against those enemy units, as if some Jinns or Spirits or Gentries are giving them Divine Inspiration as to where the enemy units are.

Even in modern battlefields, with all the sophisticated communications ability, units rarely do this kind of thing. A military unit is usually concerned with its own boundary, area-of-operation or line-of-advance, based on the Planning Phase. If asked to help other formations, it would not be so instantaneous as Z fire allows.

I mean, we as players already have too much God View and coordinated/consolidated efforts. Z-fire only boosts this coordination even more.

Besides, Steel Panther's scale is 50-meter, and that's a big area even for Direct/Targeted fire. So I kind of think that Direct/Targeted fire in SP, may as well translate to semi area-fire in real life.


But that's my personal reasons, other players may have their own reasons, supporting/against Z-fire. Honestly, I don't want Z-fire removed either, because I know there are situations where Z-fire can reflect real-life area fire (nothing comes to the top of my head right now though :doh:).


Cheers!

Re: SPWW2 handicaps vs AI
 

Predicted MG fire lanes for defence at night. USA "recon by fire".

Z-fire is far less effective than plotted indirect fire, and deliberately so. A 60mm mortar section firing its HE in plotted indirect fire will be about twice as deadly as if you pointed it at a random hex and fired in direct area fire mode (Z fire).

Still, we are looking at possible fixes for this - perhaps charging 2 ammo per shot, or 2 shots per z-firing.

Re: SPWW2 handicaps vs AI
 

That's cool Andy!

But why is this:

Is it because each "rounds" are now inherently more deadly if the fire is Plotted compared to if it's Z-fired?

Re: SPWW2 handicaps vs AI
 

More accurate and therefore more effective therefore more deadly. Z fire's coded accuracy values are low therefore less is going where it needs to go therefore less deadly. It's why normal plotted arty that is directed by an experienced FOO is more effective and more deadly that arty fired behind a tree line directed by an inexperienced FOO........Z-Fire is double blind

Re: SPWW2 handicaps vs AI
 

I see... but let's not forget that Z-fire is eligible for all units, normally (disregarding Player's own intent on limiting himself). That's why the sum result is a lot deadlier than artillery, which is usually limited in numbers. Not to mention that normal leg infantries (small arms) have more ammo "counts" than artillery units.