Three wishes for 1.05

[fredrikvollan]

Hi there,

Three wishes for 1.05...

1. That the Indian decisions have a higher probability of success. I could help the Apache nation raise one regiment in the war, but they would not come to my side...

2. That the AI targets enemy armies more than cities. I'm tired of the AI going on deep raid with massive force. Grant (Union) didnt do this strategy til 1864.

3. That the AI is more aggressive. right now, it is controlled by McClellan, just sitting there building and training and stuff but no fiighting...

[ajarnlance]

Hi there,

Three wishes for 1.05...

1. That the Indian decisions have a higher probability of success. I could help the Apache nation raise one regiment in the war, but they would not come to my side...

2. That the AI targets enemy armies more than cities. I'm tired of the AI going on deep raid with massive force. Grant (Union) didnt do this strategy til 1864.

3. That the AI is more aggressive. right now, it is controlled by McClellan, just sitting there building and training and stuff but no fiighting...

I agree with 1 and 2 very much, especially 2. I had a recent situation where the AI had my army surrounded and could have defeated me in detail. Instead it marched off to capture one of my strategic cities. As for number 3 I think that the game is accurately reflecting the historical situation. I think that the Union forces under McClellan should be reluctant to attack as this is what happened historically most of the time. That is why Lincoln stood by Grant when others wanted to get rid of him. He said: "I can't spare this man, he fights."
Most importantly I would like to see evidence of Athena having more of a cohesive strategy that reflects long-term priorities for prosecuting the war. Taking inspiration from EAW maybe the player and the AI could choose from different war plans at the outset. For example, the Union could choose to follow an Anaconda plan or a 'march on Richmond plan'. The CSA could follow a plan that either prioritised the Eastern or the Western theatres. Of course all plans need to be flexible to respond to the way the game develops. However, currently I feel that Athena gets easily distracted and confused between different priorities. As a result she often achieves very little in the way of long term strategic goals.

[pgr]

I largely agree....with the same hesitation as Aj...if AI gets more aggressive, you could see a lot more stupid little dumb deep raids. Helping AI prioritize a bit more could help.

[grimjaw]

I don't have a problem with the Indian units and probabilities as they are. They're pretty close to historic levels, from what little I've read about it. The CSA receives enough regiments from Indian territory over time to make a small division of them. Three regiments spawn with Watie, three are just west of Fort Smith, another one or two spawn in IT over time, and then you usually get the regiment from the Pimas treaty.

The other two suggestions sound fine, but I've noticed in my games lately against the Union that McClellan isn't running any armies.

[ajarnlance]

In addition to the points raised above I have also notice that Athena doesn't actively try to do a 'brown water' blockade by taking forts along the coast. At least she never has in any of my games Athena needs to be educated about 'Anaconda'.