-
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.
You could have it take care of an easy theatre ,mopping up last resistance for example, while you take care of the big fish.
Not all players want to micro manage every theatre all the time.
Of course, for some of us, Hearts of Iron is not a competition to see who can paint the world gray by 1943...
Last edited:
Its fun not real world. If you dont like it then dont use it. I myself would like to have few games with hands-off. Its good for semi realism. If you like to controll every division (like I do) then its your choice.
In my opinion the real issue is how the AI tries to reach its objective. Especially when the objective is a major urban center, the decision to surround the city or take it on the run can be crucial. Additionally, if I give an army group an objective and make it blitzkrieg, will it form one spearhead or multiple? Also, would it try a pincer movement to encircle the enemy? Those are the questions that haven't been answered and are going to be the key in how effective AI control will be.
As Johan said, the AI is the same for the player and the other countries on that level, so the question is, how effective is AI in general? The problem is not specific to player's forces.
On this note, by the way, I'd like to say to the general public - "Haha, told you so!"
Johan's outline of the "multilevel" AI (which is the same for the player as it is for the computer opponent at the "lower" levels) is basically what I predicted many months ago, which was received with some skepticism
Many players chose to leave the IC sliders automated even if it was unoptimal decision. There are many people who aren't interested in optimising their gaming for "serious gamer" level.
Also, not everyone scraps the Red Army on January 1st, 1936, builds IJN into a cruizerg force, or declares war on Tibet to get rid of the peacetime IC modifier...
These are more of exploits than evaded micromanagement, but point still stands.
Although I usually have to manage everything, I can think of situations where it could be useful. The last time I played HoI2 seriously, frx, my lads were advancing virtually at will (but for some annoying holdouts) into Central Africa. I didn't want to think about that however because Barbarossa was about to start. It would have been nice to have been able to delegate, especially since I didn't *really* care about that theatre.
Actually, that is not at all the case. The AI is much, much better at multitasking, assessing chance, assaying needs and observing for changes quickly. The AI is much, much worse at evaluating long-term potentialities (Player knows from past experiences what is coming and how things will change; aka hindsight).
The AI can be relied on to behave like an AI. The difference this time is that the structure is more segmented, which will allow it to organize better than past games. As well, with this new system available to beta, the over-all quality of the AI will improve. Patches will probably tweak the AI further.
In terms of what the Theatre AI will or will not handle, remember that it is the same AI that has to handle all the nations that the player/players are not controlling. I can't see any reason why the player-controlled countries' AI would not use as many assets as the AI controlling enemy countries.
Playing as Germany in a solo game, I anticipate that I will be using Theatre Command AI to conquer Africa once I get those formations organized, and defend conquered Britain and France. At the Army Group level, I will have the AI mop up the Primpet Marshes, and probably secure the Southen half of Turkey and defend against Allied attacks from Syria and Iraq. I may use Army Group AI to finish off the Netherlands, and defend along the Maginot line during the Spring '40 invasion.
I'm really looking forward to seeing how the AI will handle the North Atlantic after I've secured Britain. That will tell me how effective it really is. Though the campaign through the Belgian Congo will be a challenge.
This sounds really great. I wonder how far the AI can take this, imagining the US planning its massive oversea invasion of Europe. In the earlier HoI-games it always felt like oversea-attacks where more scripted events and less actual strategic decisions. Hope this will change with this new AI.
If the AI could order support in form of air or naval bombardment, that would also be nice. And of course dedicated air generals that you can give the task to use its units for support requesting commanders or in general assault enemy positions, for naval patrol a big area, prepare an assault on a coast...yea this would all be very very nice, if the AI could take all the micromanagement from the person playing. I can see a lot of players coming to this game and trying it out. Back in HoI2 I tried Switzerland first, because I imagined that would be the least trouble. With HoI3 I can try Germany and turn the AI help all the way on and be on my way of trying all the things offered piece by piece.
If the AI could order support in form of air or naval bombardment, that would also be nice. And of course dedicated air generals that you can give the task to use its units for support requesting commanders or in general assault enemy positions, for naval patrol a big area, prepare an assault on a coast...yea this would all be very very nice, if the AI could take all the micromanagement from the person playing. I can see a lot of players coming to this game and trying it out. Back in HoI2 I tried Switzerland first, because I imagined that would be the least trouble. With HoI3 I can try Germany and turn the AI help all the way on and be on my way of trying all the things offered piece by piece.
I mean, your example was pretty tame
The "serious gamer" doesn't just leave his sliders under AI control - the Cruizerg Fleet is an essential item in his toolbox and is widely considered a legitimate strategy.
This is so awesome that I'm almost completely speechless. I had no idea you would even dare to try something so ambitious as this AI. As it has been said here earlier, if you manage to get even half of this actually working, it will be a new benchmark for future gamemakers.
If anything, this DD has finally convinced me that I need to buy HoI3 immediately on release, not a year later as I normally buy my games... (I have made one exception to that rule: Empire Total War. That was a bad decision.)
If anything, this DD has finally convinced me that I need to buy HoI3 immediately on release, not a year later as I normally buy my games... (I have made one exception to that rule: Empire Total War. That was a bad decision.)
Actually doing the AI this way should make it much easier to tweak, as Johan hinted. The old "front" system was bulky and too static to function properly in a fluid conflict. It's a lot easier if you can teach the AI to do simple things first, and complex things later, instead of trying to teach it both simultaneously.
Oh its going to be so fun rping with this
Rommel ! you twat, why have you yet to win. (fired)
Hmmm.... things I would love to use the AI on
As germany:
Africa
West Front post fall of france
Scandinavia post conquest
As UK
Africa
Asia/Indian land forces
As US
Whichever theater I'm *not* concentrating on
As Japan
Post-conquest China
'Russian invasion'
SE Asia post conquest
Island defense
Hmm...this post is more about the fronts that I hate rather than the AI I guess
-Doc
Have you tried to play HOI2 or EU3 the same way the AI plays it?
No pause, no hindsight, no bending the rules?
For me , let AI control all fronts, it will make the game harder and more fun to play.
Hopefully Paradox will add if options. like you can give orders to army central to attack province Y if army north controls province X
OoC, will I be able to retain control of production regardless? As I'd love for them to give them orders but I'll prepare their forces for them, if you don't mind.
Also, will it show you their plans?
Also, will it show you their plans?