An Ai Improvment idea

[brambod1]

So I was thinking for while how i would fix the AI in HOI4. The idea that first came into my head was to change the way the combat planning works. When i first loaded up HOI4 i saw a front line mechanic and a fallback line mechanic. So one of the things i tried to do was have a front line and a fall back line at the same time. At the time i thought that i could have a front line and a fallback line where in case of a breakthrough my army would retreat to in a organized retreat to the fallback line. This would be historically accurate. in that in many wars especially world war 2 there where organized retreats to prevent encirclement. When a organized retreat did not happen the army got encircled and was forced to surrender (Stalin waiting to retreat to the Stalin line almost cost the soviet union the war and forced the Red Army to retreat within 23 miles of Moscow as well as when Hitler an army (I Forget which) to stand still and be supplied by the Luftwaffe.) This could be a good way to prevent AI being stupid and getting encircled. The AI would simply draw an front line and at a defensible position (River, Mountain etc.) draw a fallback line and in the case of a breakthrough would initiate an organized retreat to that line. The fallback line would then become the Front line. Beyond just fixing the AI being susceptible to encirclement. The fallback line could be used as a strategic reserve line. By this i mean that you could put units not at the front but on the fallback line and they would rotate with damaged units who have lost morale and equipment and the damaged unit would retreat to the fallback line and get supplies and equipment from there. This would lead to a more interesting strategic reason terrain. You would want you fallback line to be close enough that reserves can be switched and damaged units fixed in a reasonable time. But at the same time want the fallback line to be in a defensible position so that in the case of a breakthrough the position is easily defensible. You could also make Lost units retreat to the fallback line and decide where to go from there. I think this would be a interesting way to improve the AI in the front system.

 

[Bolshevik-]

I don't care how the AI gets fixed as long as it does get fixed. Unlikely though considering the fact that not enough effort is being put into HoI4 atm.

 

[redrum68]

Honestly, that could potentially make a difference but there are so many areas that I would spend time fixing/improving the AI on before that. I'm also not sure how well the fallback line even works in the battle planner.

 

[elektrizikekswerk]

When i first loaded up HOI4 i saw a front line mechanic and a fallback line mechanic. So one of the things i tried to do was have a front line and a fall back line at the same time. At the time i thought that i could have a front line and a fallback line where in case of a breakthrough my army would retreat to in a organized retreat to the fallback line. This would be historically accurate.

Exactly my thought. I'm not sure if your proposal would improve the AI, but it would definitely improve QoL.

I'm also not sure how well the fallback line even works in the battle planner.

It doesn't. At least not the way brambod (and me) was thinking it would. Iirc you cannot assign a fallback line to an army that is having a front line. As soon as you draw a fallback line the offensive orders are deleted.
So switching units between a front line and a fallback line is achieved by switching them between different armies - which has it's pros and cons.

 

[Emren]

The fallback line is simply to draw a defensive line when there is no border to another nation. Pre-positioning troops on the Volga, or the Rhine, for example, are good examples where you could set up a second line in anticipation of a breakthrough.

 

[Constans]

Excellent idea. The fallback line as currently implemented is pretty disappointing, it's very situational and less a true "fallback line" and more a weird static line.

 

[cat013]

(Stalin waiting to retreat to the Stalin line almost cost the soviet union the war and forced the Red Army to retreat within 23 miles of Moscow as well as when Hitler an army (I Forget which) to stand still and be supplied by the Luftwaffe.)

They did it not because they weren't very bright but because a mere breakthrough as a general rule doesn't warrant a retreat by itself. Even for a great commander it is extremely hard to tell a deadly breakthrough from one that is manageable. And in many situations there is simply no land to retreat to. So, if anything is needed it is exactly the opposite, something akin to the infamous Order No. 227, until the AI learns to counterattack and break encirclements properly.

 

[brambod1]

They did it not because they weren't very bright but because a mere breakthrough as a general rule doesn't warrant a retreat by itself. Even for a great commander it is extremely hard to tell a deadly breakthrough from one that is manageable. And in many situations there is simply no land to retreat to. So, if anything is needed it is exactly the opposite, something akin to the infamous Order No. 227, until the AI learns to counterattack and break encirclements properly.

I hear what your saying. But what you could do is make the commanders smarter the higher level they are. So they would be able to more easily recognize a major breakthrough. Im just saying this would help prevent people from simply brraking through and walking/driving into moscow consistantly. But i do understand where your coming from.

 

[brambod1]

The fallback line is simply to draw a defensive line when there is no border to another nation. Pre-positioning troops on the Volga, or the Rhine, for example, are good examples where you could set up a second line in anticipation of a breakthrough.

I understand that but in Together for victory they made the garrison order much better. This has caused the garrison order to be used instead of the fallback line. Im saying this is a great way to make the fallback line useful in war. As well you would still be able to draw the fallback line on a sefensive point but you will also be able to have troops use it to stratigicly retreat to it

 

[Emren]

I understand that but in Together for victory they made the garrison order much better. This has caused the garrison order to be used instead of the fallback line. Im saying this is a great way to make the fallback line useful in war

The garrison order can't be compared, IMHO. The garrson order works in a confined geographical space, whereas the fallback order is freeform. I'm not saying it can't be improved upon, in fact I think the suggestion has merit. But - if you were to be able to set up a true fallback order, in addition to the front - at what point would you want your troops to actually fall back? When they lose one province in the front line? A set percentage? Timing is critical, and I doubt that PDX could make it work the way you'd expect it to...

 

[brambod1]

The garrison order can't be compared, IMHO. The garrson order works in a confined geographical space, whereas the fallback order is freeform. I'm not saying it can't be improved upon, in fact I think the suggestion has merit. But - if you were to be able to set up a true fallback order, in addition to the front - at what point would you want your troops to actually fall back? When they lose one province in the front line? A set percentage? Timing is critical, and I doubt that PDX could make it work the way you'd expect it to...

I understand that but I have faith that Paradox could make it work. But I think its worth a chance for the possible benifits and stratigic depth that could be added. And PDX has to fix the AI somehow I think this is one way i would do it if I was the one programming. I do acknowledge that it will take some tinkering to get tight bit in the end of the day if they get it right think of the convenience to large nations knowing that it is harder to have there army get surrounded

 

[cat013]

I think better solution would be to set three kinds of lines within one battle plan: the spearheads (note the plural), the general front lines and the reserves. The last kind is "front line" for troops kept in the back and used to counter breakthroughs and to fill gaps when your actual front line stretches thin.

 

[Lykanion]

It doesn't. At least not the way brambod (and me) was thinking it would. Iirc you cannot assign a fallback line to an army that is having a front line. As soon as you draw a fallback line the offensive orders are deleted.
So switching units between a front line and a fallback line is achieved by switching them between different armies - which has it's pros and cons.

That's not correct. You can draw different front lines, offensive lines and fall back lines for a single army and then assign divisions to different plans. So

1. Draw your front lines and offensive lines as usual, assigning divisions to these plans
   
2. Draw a fallback line for the same army, but don't assign any divisions*
   
3. Once a critical situation occurs on the front line, select your army and assign all or some divisions to your prepared fallback line.
   
4. The assigned divisions will retreat to the fallback line and will defend it

*In step 2, you might want to add a few divisions to accumulate a dig in bonus and simulate prepared defences.

So, all in all the fallback lines already work like you and brambod1 thought they would, it's just that the human player has to initiate the retreat himself.

It's hard to determine if an enemy advance is a critical situation that warrants a full blown retreat or if the situation can be handled better. The AI is often capable to contain enemy breakthroughs, and a player might be even better in handling the situation. So I think it's a good thing the player decides. Otherwise we would probably have tons of angry forum posts about a 'stupid AI retreating for no reason'.

 

[Bundeswag]

Major problem is that the ai has all the troops at front, so there is no reserve. The same army should be able to have a frontline and also a garrison order behind it, so if a point like a city is reached there would be fresh units defending it. Now in the current situation citiea like Moscow and Leningrad are left undefended as the ai doesn't see them being threatened until the frontline reaches them and then it is too late. Imo having a simple oob with army group and armies under could help with managing this.

 

[elektrizikekswerk]

@Lykanion Thank you, I stand corrected.
I basically did the same, just with to designated armies.

I really thought the defensive order deleted the offensive one.