Development Diary #27 - 6th of May 2009

[joeenochs]

Johan isn't suggesting that OKH be assigned to AI control. The implication is that Army Groups North and South are under AI control, but Army Group Center is not.

Yes, but:

- Army Group center would lose the theater bonus. Why, if AI versus player control is just a game thing and not a reality thing?

- If I want to drop human control for Army Group Center, I have to assign it to the Eastern theater again. This seems no big deal for an army group, but for a corps or division I will probably have forgotten its original place in the chain of command. Why can't the game simply remember the assignment and deactivate it temporarily for AI planning purposes.

(Notice, that in my example I wanted to mess around just with the 6th army. This means Army Group Center (or South for that matter) would remain under AI control. But it does not really matter, what example we take.)

 

[Alexander Seil]

Yes, but:

- Army Group center would lose the theater bonus. Why, if AI versus player control is just a game thing and not a reality thing?

No, it would not. It's still under the OKH, which is human controlled. Army Groups North and South are AI-controlled, on the other hand.

 

[joeenochs]

No, it would not. It's still under the OKH, which is human controlled. Army Groups North and South are AI-controlled, on the other hand.

Who says, OKH is human controlled? I want it to be AI controlled, so all the Army Groups know what to do. I only want to control the 6th army.
This is perfectly possible in the current system, if I detach the 6th army from its army group assignment before taking control. No other unit/HQ will be affected. But it exactly has the disadvantages I described above.

 

[Alexander Seil]

Who says, OKH is human controlled? I want it to be AI controlled, so all the Army Groups know what to do. I only want to control the 6th army.
This is perfectly possible in the current system, if I detach the 6th army from its army group assignment before taking control. No other unit/HQ will be affected. But it exactly has the disadvantages I described above.

But why not just put Army Groups North and South under AI control, separately?

 

[joeenochs]

But why not just put Army Groups North and South under AI control, separately?

Because I want the additional level of coordination, an AI controlled theater (OKH) can give me. I also want Army Group Central take care of itself. (The 6th army was actually part of army group south, if I am not wrong but anyway.)
I only want to control this single 6th army. And I can by detaching it from its army group. The AI will treat it, as if it is not there. My only point is, let the assignment be still there for bonus reasons and for later undo of manual control.

Sorry, I don't get, what is hard to understand there.

 

[joeenochs]

Mhmm, I am starting to get your point.

My scenario is possible, but not such a good idea, because the coodination of OKH and army group will be distorted. It makes sense, that I better leave the 6th army in its army group, but then army group and theater AI control will be disabled as well.

If I am done, I just switch back on AI control for OKH.

Everything presented in the diary makes perfect sense.

 

[Rich Oliver]

So lets get this straight, if I control everything do I get all the HQ and General bonuses as usual?

 

[joeenochs]

So lets get this straight, if I control everything do I get all the HQ and General bonuses as usual?

Sure. Only by changing the command structure you change bonuses.

 

[henryjai]

finally no longer i need 20 divisions suppressing patisans in yugoslavia. now maybe 8 is enough.

 

[hopper2002]

you want auto-pilot rules and temporarily turn AP off for one 'unit' but have it turned back on after 'your' order is accomplished? Yeah, it makes sense but is it 100% bug proof and code-able?

 

[joeenochs]

you want auto-pilot rules and temporarily turn AP off for one 'unit' but have it turned back on after 'your' order is accomplished? Yeah, it makes sense but is it 100% bug proof and code-able?

I think, it will definitely be possible as a manual process, but might result
in poor AI performance. Just detach the unit from its higher command and make it a stand alone unit. Then make it human controlled. Attach it back, when you are done.

If it is wise, it is another question.

The problem is, that while the unit is detached, the AI will act as it is not there. This might not be a big problem for a single division, but if you detach a whole army, the AI will try to fill a gap, which is not there. Because it does not know, what you will do with the unit.
If you would even detach army group central for example, the theater AI would try to cover the whole front with army group north and south.

Also, of course, any bonuses are gone from the higher level of commands for the stand alone units.

So what the devs forsee as a better way is to leave the unit in its chain of command and just enable human control for it. In this case AI control for all upper levels are also switched off. This will prevent the higher level AI controls from getting confused and making stupid decisions.

 

[Keioel]

I am extremely excited for this feature as it will seriously make my life easier defending the beaches from the Japanese I can't wait to play around with all the possibilities of this feature

 

[lordvagrant]

I think, it will definitely be possible as a manual process, but might result
in poor AI performance. Just detach the unit from its higher command and make it a stand alone unit. Then make it human controlled. Attach it back, when you are done.

If it is wise, it is another question.

The problem is, that while the unit is detached, the AI will act as it is not there. This might not be a big problem for a single division, but if you detach a whole army, the AI will try to fill a gap, which is not there. Because it does not know, what you will do with the unit.
If you would even detach army group central for example, the theater AI would try to cover the whole front with army group north and south.

Also, of course, any bonuses are gone from the higher level of commands for the stand alone units.

So what the devs forsee as a better way is to leave the unit in its chain of command and just enable human control for it. In this case AI control for all upper levels are also switched off. This will prevent the higher level AI controls from getting confused and making stupid decisions.

Another option for you as the player is to leave the entire theatre under AI control, but to adjust the priorities within the theatre; that is, select more focus provinces within the 6th army's area of operation / remove minor objectives from other sectors. This way the AI should allocate it's reserves and new formations to your critical sector, maybe even shifting other armies/groups closer to that front.
This way you can feel that you have meddled without having to issue orders to individual corps, and if you get distracted the AI will continue while you work out what to do with Rommel now he is at the Suez/deal with whoever is attacking the Tirpitz this time.

 

[Alerias]

You mentioned the German AI considering the invasion of Britain.

Is this a hint that the AI will deal better with invasions requiring naval action? Doomsday was vastly improved over stock Hoi2, IIRC, but the AI still had a hard time coordinating a large seaborne invasion, both as Allies or Axis. This was also very obvious in the Pacific, where the Japanese AI would take years to achieve the conquest of the south Pacific.

 

[Alerias]

So lets get this straight, if I control everything do I get all the HQ and General bonuses as usual?

Nothing says otherwise! Dont see why you wouldnt.

The only point of this is to let the player offload some micromanagement to the AI; also it may make the game a bit more realistic; even Hitler and Stalin couldn't manage the movements of every single division, all the time.

But you get to, if you like that.

 

[ArmChairAttila]

Many of my questions about order of battle game play has been answered here. Thank you Johan and keep up the good work...

2 thumbs way up

 

[King]

Nothing says otherwise! Dont see why you wouldnt.

The only point of this is to let the player offload some micromanagement to the AI; also it may make the game a bit more realistic; even Hitler and Stalin couldn't manage the movements of every single division, all the time.

But you get to, if you like that.

Pretty much spot on with the system here.

 

[Oorlog]

This will help a great deal when learning the game at first. Also no more managing multiple fronts. I recall thinking once that it would be great if you could give orders/objectives to your troops for longer periods of time and you could sit back and do other stuff in the meantime.

Since the AI gives an indication on whats needed on the front to win, would be great if you could tie this to production aswell so you can leave that to the ai aswell

 

[GAGA Extrem]

Will leader abilites and skill levels influence AI behaviour?

Will, lets say, "I-got-tanks" level 6 Rommel act smarter than "I-have-badges" lvl 1 Heimller?

 

[King]

Will leader abilites and skill levels influence AI behaviour?

Will, lets say, "I-got-tanks" level 6 Rommel act smarter than "I-have-badges" lvl 1 Heimller?

no