Suggested AI Improvements
Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2021 3:52 pm
I want to say up front I love this game and that I think the AI is actually quite good at keeping me honest and exploiting any errors in my play as long as it can achieve its objective in a single turn. However, there are five areas where I think it could be improved, some of which I think should be straight forward (like #1), some of which are less so. I'm not sure how much AI behavior changes at different difficulty levels, but I play almost entirely on Hard so my experiences should reflect the strongest play on the AI's part.
Note that I'm suggesting these from the perspective of how the AI can best oppose the player's goals, its possible that some of these "weaknesses" are intentional to better model how real divisions would behave in the field. Hopefully this feedback is useful.
(1) Oppose River Crossings, especially Pontoon Bridges: My troops drive up to a river, the AI holds the bridges on the other side, so I drop a pontoon bridge to give me an alternative crossing point. In my experience, the AI frequently fails to react and allows me to just cross that bridge the following turn, even when it has units in range who are not guarding other crossing points or objectives. This is particularly important when it happens at a major river, which would require me to have the appropriate HQ ability unlocked and spend command points to cross (adding this behavior would also make these high-tier and at the moment rarely used abilities more important).
(2) Retreat out of supply units, even if fortified: In my experience, it is not uncommon for me to breakthrough a front line and put some of the units on the front line out of supply without completely closing the encirclement. These units will frequently remain where they are, even though the area they are holding is no longer important and they could do a whole lot more good trying to prevent the encirclement or sometimes even escaping the pocket to fight another day. I even see units stay put and remain out of supply when they could shift one or two hexes to get back in supply and there seems to be no disadvantage to do so.
(3) More aggressive breakout attempts by surrounded units: In my experience, the AI is quite timid in trying to break out of pockets. Unless I either leave a unit on the outside who can be hit with a Odds #6+ attack or put a supply dump somewhere on the pocket edge, it frequently does nothing with the units inside. This lets them go from 1 turn out of supply (where they are still dangerous) to 2 turns out of supply (where they can no longer attack, and become free experience for my units). It does this even when it has plenty of room to maneuver in the pocket and could break out by attacking a single point with several of its trapped units in turn. Note that this is one of those areas where lack of aggression may be more realistic: from a game perspective the surrounded units are effectively dead already, so it is better that they take some opposing soldiers with them, but in real life the tens of thousands of men these units represent would prefer to sit tight and surrender after they run out of ammunition.
(4) Multi-turn raids on supply lines with weak units: The AI is very good at spotting opportunities to send its units into rear areas where it can cut supply (particularly to an HQ), but it only seems to do so when it can achieve its supply cutting objective THAT TURN. In my experience, bypassed units which could be quite a nuisance by charging around rear areas will remain in place and just wait to die. The AI could also disrupt my plans by sending one- or two- step units through gaps in my line in a way which doesn't cut supply immediately, but which would force me to react and pull other valuable units out of position.
(5) Preservation of a mobile reserve: The most challenging part of several scenarios (e.g., Overlord) is hunting down and killing the enemies powerful tank units so that relatively vulnerable infantry can advance safely. The AI often makes this much easier than it needs to be by parking its valuable tank units on the front lines, where they are vulnerable to airstrikes (sometimes even to naval strikes!) and are easily killed by friendly armor. The AI would do better to put its infantry on the front line and use its armor as a mobile reserve which can counter-attacks any breakthrough. In my experience, the AI also doesn’t properly utilize hit and run tactics: when it sends tanks forward to attack it often leaves those units on the front lines where they are vulnerable to counter attack instead of retreating them a hex or two to a point where they would be safer.
Note that I'm suggesting these from the perspective of how the AI can best oppose the player's goals, its possible that some of these "weaknesses" are intentional to better model how real divisions would behave in the field. Hopefully this feedback is useful.
(1) Oppose River Crossings, especially Pontoon Bridges: My troops drive up to a river, the AI holds the bridges on the other side, so I drop a pontoon bridge to give me an alternative crossing point. In my experience, the AI frequently fails to react and allows me to just cross that bridge the following turn, even when it has units in range who are not guarding other crossing points or objectives. This is particularly important when it happens at a major river, which would require me to have the appropriate HQ ability unlocked and spend command points to cross (adding this behavior would also make these high-tier and at the moment rarely used abilities more important).
(2) Retreat out of supply units, even if fortified: In my experience, it is not uncommon for me to breakthrough a front line and put some of the units on the front line out of supply without completely closing the encirclement. These units will frequently remain where they are, even though the area they are holding is no longer important and they could do a whole lot more good trying to prevent the encirclement or sometimes even escaping the pocket to fight another day. I even see units stay put and remain out of supply when they could shift one or two hexes to get back in supply and there seems to be no disadvantage to do so.
(3) More aggressive breakout attempts by surrounded units: In my experience, the AI is quite timid in trying to break out of pockets. Unless I either leave a unit on the outside who can be hit with a Odds #6+ attack or put a supply dump somewhere on the pocket edge, it frequently does nothing with the units inside. This lets them go from 1 turn out of supply (where they are still dangerous) to 2 turns out of supply (where they can no longer attack, and become free experience for my units). It does this even when it has plenty of room to maneuver in the pocket and could break out by attacking a single point with several of its trapped units in turn. Note that this is one of those areas where lack of aggression may be more realistic: from a game perspective the surrounded units are effectively dead already, so it is better that they take some opposing soldiers with them, but in real life the tens of thousands of men these units represent would prefer to sit tight and surrender after they run out of ammunition.
(4) Multi-turn raids on supply lines with weak units: The AI is very good at spotting opportunities to send its units into rear areas where it can cut supply (particularly to an HQ), but it only seems to do so when it can achieve its supply cutting objective THAT TURN. In my experience, bypassed units which could be quite a nuisance by charging around rear areas will remain in place and just wait to die. The AI could also disrupt my plans by sending one- or two- step units through gaps in my line in a way which doesn't cut supply immediately, but which would force me to react and pull other valuable units out of position.
(5) Preservation of a mobile reserve: The most challenging part of several scenarios (e.g., Overlord) is hunting down and killing the enemies powerful tank units so that relatively vulnerable infantry can advance safely. The AI often makes this much easier than it needs to be by parking its valuable tank units on the front lines, where they are vulnerable to airstrikes (sometimes even to naval strikes!) and are easily killed by friendly armor. The AI would do better to put its infantry on the front line and use its armor as a mobile reserve which can counter-attacks any breakthrough. In my experience, the AI also doesn’t properly utilize hit and run tactics: when it sends tanks forward to attack it often leaves those units on the front lines where they are vulnerable to counter attack instead of retreating them a hex or two to a point where they would be safer.