I have restarted the game over 80 times in the last hour hoping to get an oppose Hitler start.

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
There will be an option to set the AI to True Random, right?

Surprising alternate history is why I play PDX games in first place.
I think he means the game rules that are coming. However I wouldn't consider that a true solute the issue in this thread, that is that in ahistorical lots of the ahistorical paths are just blocked off. Setting a game rule to have Germany go monachist isn't the same as it happening sometimes at random which offers a surprise and a chance to react to an unexpected situation.
 
The way I see it there are 3 types of people who want differents results from the "a/historical" options:

1 - People who want pure historical, so default historical focus already present.
2 - People who just want the AI to do slightly different choices but still stay true to the WWII events (example small choices like Soviet Collectivism or Positive heroism, different type of industrial or military focuses etc.).
3 - People who want the AI to do true random ahistorical paths (oppose Hitler, UK commonwealth nations to go comm. or facist, etc), but still do it in a logical sense and react to the player (no germany declaring too much wars and become overwhelmed).

Maybe there should be 3 options for AI historical focuses with achievement compatibility?
 
I am quite surprised that it's set not to be picked even with historical focuses off, and honestly it's very disappointing. I thought that was literally the point of having the choice between historical focuses forced or not forced? Particularly with the new alternate history trees. They make the game more interesting for me when the AI can pick them as well, not just when I can pick them.

And it's not a great argument to say I can force it in 1.6, because I don't want to force it. I want it to be random or based on other factors (such as how France now picks sides based on what Germany does). Feel free to put a weighting in there, even if that weighting is 90-10. But don't put a weighting in there and then force a choice anyway.

I don't know what else to say. I'm just disappointed.
 
Okay, that's good. Will it be completely random, though, or will it be weighted or allow the possibility of weighting?

I'm imagining that in game setup you'll have a variety of strategies a given country can follow. So France might have, "Historical", "Competent Democracy", "Communist", and "Fascist" as the strategies you can tell it to use.

Then under that there's a "Random" strategy where it picks one of those four at random. I don't think an AI that just picks focuses at random would be much fun to play with.
 
I agree, but that was the decision at the time. It won't be an issue in 1.6.

To expand on what @GSP Jr said: the historical Focus setting (bar some exceptions) locks the AI into picking certain focuses, which is highly implausible even if the human player commits to doing it too. Historical leaders were not certain what the others would do.
I always play with historical AI focus disabled not because I want the AI to do something ahistorical, but to allow it to pick appropriately according to the situation which may or may not be the historical pick, forcing me to do the same. I don't go into a game thinking "I will be fascist France fighting against monarchist Germany". I'll do whatever is most appropriate in the given situation and adapt just like the AI should.
Now there's a debate to be had what the probability of picking "Oppose Hitler" should be (I agree it should be higher) and why the game is making it so unnecessarily hard to define these probabilities. But disabling historical AI focus does not mean "throw historical causality out of the window" but instead "allow the AI to make focus choices too".

There will be an option to set the AI to True Random, right?

Surprising alternate history is why I play PDX games in first place.

This, whatever ever other options exists (which is good, more options is better) the simple -ahistorical- box ticked should give us AI that chose a path at game start, a communist, democratic, monarchist, fascist or whatever else its available and then reacts to the game as it develops.

If people want a Hitler-led Germany but everything else "flexible", then they should have that option, pick ahistorical and then a further set of options to tweak your ahsitorical campaign, where you can pick France's focus path or Ger's, etc. I think this is the best solution to the problem. But the core function should be the ahistorical gameworld, where AI decide whatever it wants to do. I personally don't want to know beforehand, before i pick a country what the AI will do.

You can set the German AI to pick randomly in 1.6

That's all you had to say brah!
 
I checked the code and I see nothing that prevents picking focuses with weight 1. The weighting is skewed however and does not work like in other places that use weights like this. Each focus rolls a die from 0 up to its ai_will_do value and the largest value wins. For example if one focus with ai_will_do 2 is available and another with ai_will_do 4 the pick ratio the latter wins in 50% of the cases where it rolls above 1 and half of the remaining cases where both roll between 0 and 1. So the pick rate is not 33% vs 66% but actually 25% vs 75%. Simulating this method with all the German starting focus weights 100000 times I get ~136 times Oppose Hitler, i.e. it takes on average 735 games to get this start.

Edit: also the dice roll is not done for ai_will_do's below 1; this means 0.999 is twice as likely to be picked as 1.0

We were specifically told by the person who made the system that this is not how it works. There is no dice roll on the base value, it just takes the ai_weight of all the available focuses, adds a random value of up to 50% to it, and then picks the focus with the highest value. That means if a focus is not within 50% of the base value of the highest available focus, it will never be picked.

I decided to test this so I created a mod where I modified the generic focus tree to have a weight of 1 for the navy, industry and political focuses, a weight of 10000 for the army focus and a different value in each series of tests for the aviation focus. I then checked how many of the 57 countries using that focus tree pick the aviation focus as their first choice. Each test series consists of 10 games. All results can be seen in the attached screenshot.

In the first series I used a value of 5001, because then the aviation focus should only be taken when it gets the minimum random multiplier of 1 while the army focus gets the maximum multiplier of 0.5, assuming the official statements are correct.
The results of the first series show a chance of about 25% for the aviation focus to be chosen. This would only be consistent with the official statements if there are no steps in between 1 and 0.5, so for every focus it would be a coin flip between that focus' AI weight being unmodified or cut in half. Even if there was only one step in between the two (for example 0.75), the observed chance for aviation being picked would be too high, as it should then only be about 18%.

In the second series I used a value of 9998, which should produce exactly the same results as the first series if it is indeed only a coin flip between the multipliers of 1 and 0.5, because again only a combination of 1 for the aviation focus and 0.5 for the army focus would cause the aviation focus to be taken.
However, the results now show a chance of about 50% for the aviation focus, which is inconsistent with the results from the first series. It might be possible to explain the results if the chance or method of assigning the multipliers is somehow different depending on the difference between the focuses' AI weights, but this would seem needlessly complicated. However, the results are perfectly consistent with bitmode's diceroll theory.

I then did a third series with a value of 4000, which means if the official statements are true, the aviation focus should not be picked at all, because 4000 is less than 50% of 10000.
But, this assumption turned out to be completely wrong, as the aviation focus was still picked with a chance of about 20%, which is again consistent with the diceroll theory.

There was another developer statement in this thread claiming that the limit for focuses to be picked is actually 1/3 of the focus with the highest weight, so I decided to add a quick final test. Here, I used a value of 400 for the aviation focus, which is only 4% of the 10000 for the army focus, but in the fifth test game, Oman picked the aviation focus, so there seems to be no limit under which a focus absolutely cannot be taken, which means Germany should at least have a slight chance of opposing Hitler.

Also, I apparently have too much free time if I decide to spend it on analyzing video games like this.

Focus.png
 
I would not think of it merely as analyzing a video game. It was a mental exercise in mathematical curiosity. That is healthy and therefor should not be seen as a waste.
 
The random rule uses a different system but I will add this to my growing list of "lostech is a real concept in the real world and HoI 4 is a good example of lostech in action"
 
You can set the German AI to pick randomly in 1.6
Assuming there will be a "random" setting which will let all countries chose their focuses at random, will it actually allow for true randomness? Right now there are paths that countries will not take in their tree even with historical focuses turned off. Many of the communist paths are an example of this. In 1.6 if I select for focuses to be random, will there be a chance of perhaps a communist Hungary or a fascist Czechoslovakia or will the current weighting system be maintained even on random?
 
I believe I have reported this in "Bug-Reports" earlier but here again;

"Ahistorical games have some problems. Below I have listed some problems with how the AI is scripted to behave on ahistorical - and the reason is it is a AHISTORICAL game- so the it should definitely not be a 1% chance to occur on ahistorical matches. These numbers should be pumped up, since ahistorical should be ahistorical and have a higher chance to occur.

1. "Berlin-Moscow Alliance" (Germany) : This focus has a whooping 1% (0.01 factor) chance to be done by the A.I.! That is so sad - as a democratic nation or someone across the world minding their own business, i'd like to see this alliance happen in a single player game - as it would be interesting to happen and is fun! Why is it a 1%(0.01) factor??

2. "Befriend Czechslovakia" (Germany) : This focus has a factor of 2.5 base. Although I have never seen it on an ahistorical game. It has some small modifiers if Czechoslovakia proves to do their appeasement to Germany or has a high opinion - although I have rarely seen this as well. I suggest pumping up some of the factor numbers a bit to make it more likely to happen.

3. "Befriend Poland" (Germany) : This focus that Germany can do has a factor of 0. Meaning the AI will NEVER do this?! What?? Why is this the case - why would the AI be restricted from turning Poland into a buffer state against the soviets. It should defintely NOT be a factor of 0.

4. "Go Left/Right" (Czechslovakia) : both have a factor of 30 compared to democratic factor of 90. Can we fix this a bit so it has a higher chance to happen naturally? Maybe 70 - 45 - 45 would be better for ahistorical.

5. "Go Left/Right" (Hungary) : Going left has a factor of 30 compared to the fascist factor of 90. In ahistorical can we make this a little more even so more interesting things happen? Maybe 80 - 50 in favor of facism.

6. "Little Entente" (France) : Creating the Little Entente has a factor of .1 on ahistorical. This is in comparision with .9 to join the allies. I suggest evening this out a bit.

Whew, that was a lot of work to go through all of those.. Such simple tweaks to these numbers can greatly enhance the "ahistoricalness" of "Ahistorical" games! "

I believe that it's not only a problem with OPPOSE HITLER, but also tons of other focuses too!!
I might not truly understand how the values work, but I can tell by what i've seen with ahistorical focuses off. And I never really see most of these.

If the "Random" rule selection that the devs are saying happens to not disable achievements - then thats good by me!!
Please say it doesn't disable achievments ;(
 
Assuming there will be a "random" setting which will let all countries chose their focuses at random, will it actually allow for true randomness? Right now there are paths that countries will not take in their tree even with historical focuses turned off. Many of the communist paths are an example of this. In 1.6 if I select for focuses to be random, will there be a chance of perhaps a communist Hungary or a fascist Czechoslovakia or will the current weighting system be maintained even on random?

On random, the AI will chose a random strategy plan, which usually include a communist plan.
 
Does it disable achievements @Archangel85

Please say it doesn't :)
 
Seems like it would, otherwise you can just pick that every major country follow your ideology and the country you need to conquer follow the opposing one, and trivialise any achievement.

For an all random ruleset?
 
Alright; so setting a country on a specific path disables achievements,
but the new true random setting will NOT, but it has not been confirmed yet?