How does the Military AI interpret HOI3/units/models data?

[John Hutton]

If I added more unit tech level class names that were close to the same tech level, would that confuse enemy AI's assessment of how strong those units are?

For example, let's say I were to tinker with units/models/USA - ships.txt and tfh/localization/Models.txt to add all of the different US destroyer classes commissioned in the interwar period. The Fletcher class would go from the equivalent of a Destroyer IV to a Destroyer XII, even though the it's tech levels would still be destroyer_armament = 3, destroyer_antiaircraft =3, destroyer_engine = 3, destroyer_armour = 3, smallwarship_radar = 0, smallwarship_asw = 1, destroyer_escort_role = 0, destroyer_crew_training = 0, spotting = 0.

Would the enemy AI think that it is a 1952 tech level destroyer because it is the destroyer.11 entry in USA - ships.txt (which would be displayed as a Destroyer XII if Models.txt doesn't define a class name for it for flavor), or can it still see that it is actually built from 1936 techs?

Or, does the AI even consider that some units of the same type are stronger or weaker because of tech when deciding how to move its unit?

Thanks!

 

[Wraith11B]

No. Models and techs mean literally nothing to the AI... it just sees a unit that can move somewhere and uses it.

This is why it uses Armor to garrison small islands in the South Atlantic and Garrison units to push an advance into the jungles of SE Asia.

 

[John Hutton]

No. Models and techs mean literally nothing to the AI... it just sees a unit that can move somewhere and uses it.

This is why it uses Armor to garrison small islands in the South Atlantic and Garrison units to push an advance into the jungles of SE Asia.

Okay, thanks.

I was actually asking if tinkering with those files would screw up an enemy's AI. Like, they would retreat from a weaker fleet because they were confused into thinking that it was way more technologically advanced than their own fleet.

But I think your answer covers that base as well. You're saying that, as far as the AI is concerned, "A destroyer is a destroyer, is a destroyer." It doesn't consider which side has better destroyers at all. Right?

 

[Wraith11B]

Exactly. Besides, the Naval AI will suicide their fleet because it doesn't quite know how things like that work... so, for instance, in my AAR, the UK RN AI just launched wave after wave of small battle groups of battleships and maybe some escorts into the Kattegat with no care, but then sent basically a massive doomstack to the Pacific with about half a dozen carriers but almost no CAGs.

 

[Kovax]

But I think your answer covers that base as well. You're saying that, as far as the AI is concerned, "A destroyer is a destroyer, is a destroyer." It doesn't consider which side has better destroyers at all. Right?

Worse. To the AI, a unit is a unit, regardless of what it happens to be.

With ships, all "escorts" (CL or DD) are the same, all "capital ships" (CA, BC, BB) are identical, and CVs and CVLs are merely capital ships (with a few minor differences if they actually have CAGs aboard), and will be used interchangeably. To add injury to insult, the AI will happily run a fleet of capital ships without escorts. The net result is that, rather than having most of the shots taken at fast and elusive escorts with infrequent hits, ALL of the incoming fire will be directed against the slower capital ships, consequently with a far higher hit rate. There's an additional penalty for insufficient escorts, just to seal the lid on the coffin.

It's even worse on land, where a garrison brigade is seen as identical to a heavy armor brigade, and will be used interchangeably. This leads to GER frequently sending wave upon wave of motorized and armored divisions into the mountains of central Norway, where they quickly run out of fuel and then supply due to the limitations of the minor port which they rely on. The obvious solution to the lack of movable units at the front is to send MORE units. Two divisions of MTN troops would easily have done the job, where 30-50 divisions of mechanized, motorized, and armored troops and regular infantry fail repeatedly. I've also seen GER invade DEN with one regular INF division, two GAR divisions, and a number of HQs, which obviously took a VERY long time to finish the job, despite being essentially unopposed for most of it.

I don't think your changes can make it much worse than it is now.