AI: Rough Terrain Immobilization

[iCaMpWiThAWP]

Originally Posted by 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...

[RERomine]

Originally Posted by iCaMpWiThAWP

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]

Originally Posted by RERomine

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]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

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 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

[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!