I kept doing the same thing. This just gets better and better!
I did the exact same thing...
I kept doing the same thing. This just gets better and better!
I think this was mostly answered already, but - the theatre AI will only control the units assigned to it. The "region of interest" and the units assigned to the theatre are independent and orthogonal. The AI will attempt to move any units assigned to it which are NOT within its region of interest, into it. In this way it's very easy to order troops to move between fronts, you just reassign them from one theatre HQ to another and let the AI handle the actual movement (including any necessary sea transporting etc).
That's why I didn't get it. Why go through all of this trouble to define Theater areas? Just to instill a notion of what its area of interest is in the AI? I suppose that explains it, though.
The actual utility of that notion is somewhat in doubt, though, even if it works well when activated. A Theater is probably a bit too high-level for most players to just farm out to the AI (except for British and US players where global commitments are just overwhelming). I expect to be commanding mostly at Army/Corps level (i.e., on a scale similar to HoI2's stacks).
Looking forward to a proper D-Day invasion.
Only problem with HoI3 is that my expectations are so high. Seems like it's going to be the best game ever, but what if they pull a Molyneux (infamous video game producer of the game Fable known for always making "the best game ever")
That's why I didn't get it. Why go through all of this trouble to define Theater areas? Just to instill a notion of what its area of interest is in the AI? I suppose that explains it, though.
The actual utility of that notion is somewhat in doubt, though, even if it works well when activated. A Theater is probably a bit too high-level for most players to just farm out to the AI (except for British and US players where global commitments are just overwhelming). I expect to be commanding mostly at Army/Corps level (i.e., on a scale similar to HoI2's stacks).
I think these 2 things can do wonders in a wargame. I can't agree with those who say that the game would be more fun with less clicks. I still think the player has a huge role to play during wars and battles. Choosing a plan among the ones proposed by the AI would not be enough to enjoy playing. You can let the AI organize the supply routes, you can let it control air fleets and infantry divisions, but I think you can not let it control an entire theatre. There is no strategy in letting the computer fight for you. And no fun neither.
But someone on this server said that he would let his defensive theatres under the AI command, and I think that's a nice way of doing things. Anyway, PI does give us the choice between using the AI and not using it, which is great.
Looking forward to a proper D-Day invasion.
Only problem with HoI3 is that my expectations are so high. Seems like it's going to be the best game ever, but what if they pull a Molyneux (infamous video game producer of the game Fable known for always making "the best game ever")
I agree. I was not suggesting nor would I play a game that only allowed one to sit and watch the war after selecting between a set of plans.
Hmmm i might play a government sim that allowed you to declare war but you had to run the country and react to outcome of battles and campaigns. Dunno would depend on what else the game offered. Have to offer an awful lot thought
I really like the approach of indirect control - I always wanted a strategy game where I really only determine "strategy", not micromanage the tactics below.
Also, Socratatus: If one company can pull of an AI that manages, it's Paradox!
Fair enough. While I was reading your previous posts, it came to my mind that you did not want to be involved in battles, just set and organize your army.
As a matter of fact it could be great to play such a game, but it would not be a wargame anymore. It would get close to SimCountry, like.