Odd Victory--But Hey, Its Still a Win!

[humblelawstudent]

Okay, so I just won my first full campaign as the South. My settings were normal difficulty, full AI behavior, normal aggressiveness, and everything else pretty much set to normal, and the setting that slightly improves the AI but increases turn time.

It is early June '64. I'd had General Lee, along with another powerful corp. sitting across the river from D.C. for well over two years. Primarily, it was to keep the large union force protecting D.C. from ever leaving, while I wrecked havoc on their flanks.

Over the past two years most of the war had been fought in Tennessee, Kentucky, and Missouri. For those two years, I had slowly and steadily gained ground, conquering all of those three states. I used constant cavalry raids north of West Virginia to tear up tracks and blow depots. I also controlled several towns in Indiana and Illinois.

Back to the east. I had made two attacks, one a year, in an attempt to draw out the union forces (like Lee did leading up to Gettysburg). Each time I was overwhelmed by superior Union numbers. Even when battles when 2-1 in my favor, their numbers would still wear me down.

So, I settled back, built forts along the James(?) river and let them pound against my level 8 fortifications. Eventually come '63, I marshalled two strong corps of 30k men each, and a cavalry force lead by Stuart and others of about 20k. They struck north of D.C. capturing several cities, 4-6 regions north of D.C. Winter that year was long and harsh, so had the two corps hole up in a city, thinking they would just pass the winter there, north of D.C., but well within striking range when the weather warmed. Well, in late Feb., eight, yes eight Union corp attacked and besieged my two corp. It must have been 100k-150k men. I tried to send reinforcements without weakening my line too much, but they were beaten back. I couldn't get any supplies through. After 2-3 months, they surrendered. I was stunned. I couldn't believe it. More than a third of army in the area had been wiped out.

After I wiped away the tears, knowing the hell my men would go through in a Union POW camp, I let my cursor stroll over D.C. in seemingly impotent rage. And low and behold, a miracle! D.C. was protected by a measingly 3 Corp. or so. I immediately send Lee and other corp in a mad rampage across the river. It was do or die. I had massive batteries of siege artillery, 20 lbers., and Parrot rifled cannon. At sea, I had 6 ironclads firing in support. I pressed, "end turn" with great trepidation.

Turn Processing . . .

Supply 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Day 1/15 . . .

On day twelve, hell froze over. Lee and his men smashed into D.C. with fury. They fought through the alleys and streets. Onward! To Victory! The artillery boomed in support. The roads out of D.C. clogged with the mass of refuges fleeing my army. The Union reinforcements couldn't make it in time. By the end of the day, D.C. was mine. It cost 12 thousand causalties, but I took the city, and won the war. Decisive victory was mine.

I'd like to say sacrificing my two corp to draw away the enemy armies guarding D.C. was a tactical choice I made, but I can't. But, hey, isn't there something about snatching victory from the jaws of defeat . . .?

[Joseignacio]

Okay, so I just won my first full campaign as the South. My settings were normal difficulty, full AI behavior, normal aggressiveness, and everything else pretty much set to normal, and the setting that slightly improves the AI but increases turn time.

It is early June '64. I'd had General Lee, along with another powerful corp. sitting across the river from D.C. for well over two years. Primarily, it was to keep the large union force protecting D.C. from ever leaving, while I wrecked havoc on their flanks.

Over the past two years most of the war had been fought in Tennessee, Kentucky, and Missouri. For those two years, I had slowly and steadily gained ground, conquering all of those three states. I used constant cavalry raids north of West Virginia to tear up tracks and blow depots. I also controlled several towns in Indiana and Illinois.

Back to the east. I had made two attacks, one a year, in an attempt to draw out the union forces (like Lee did leading up to Gettysburg). Each time I was overwhelmed by superior Union numbers. Even when battles when 2-1 in my favor, their numbers would still wear me down.

So, I settled back, built forts along the James(?) river and let them pound against my level 8 fortifications. Eventually come '63, I marshalled two strong corps of 30k men each, and a cavalry force lead by Stuart and others of about 20k. They struck north of D.C. capturing several cities, 4-6 regions north of D.C. Winter that year was long and harsh, so had the two corps hole up in a city, thinking they would just pass the winter there, north of D.C., but well within striking range when the weather warmed. Well, in late Feb., eight, yes eight Union corp attacked and besieged my two corp. It must have been 100k-150k men. I tried to send reinforcements without weakening my line too much, but they were beaten back. I couldn't get any supplies through. After 2-3 months, they surrendered. I was stunned. I couldn't believe it. More than a third of army in the area had been wiped out.

After I wiped away the tears, knowing the hell my men would go through in a Union POW camp, I let my cursor stroll over D.C. in seemingly impotent rage. And low and behold, a miracle! D.C. was protected by a measingly 3 Corp. or so. I immediately send Lee and other corp in a mad rampage across the river. It was do or die. I had massive batteries of siege artillery, 20 lbers., and Parrot rifled cannon. At sea, I had 6 ironclads firing in support. I pressed, "end turn" with great trepidation.

Turn Processing . . .

Supply 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Day 1/15 . . .

On day twelve, hell froze over. Lee and his men smashed into D.C. with fury. They fought through the alleys and streets. Onward! To Victory! The artillery boomed in support. The roads out of D.C. clogged with the mass of refuges fleeing my army. The Union reinforcements couldn't make it in time. By the end of the day, D.C. was mine. It cost 12 thousand causalties, but I took the city, and won the war. Decisive victory was mine.

I'd like to say sacrificing my two corp to draw away the enemy armies guarding D.C. was a tactical choice I made, but I can't. But, hey, isn't there something about snatching victory from the jaws of defeat . . .?

Three corps or you mean three brigades? I found Washington often underdefended.

[humblelawstudent]

Three corps. There were still a fair number of troops, but it was still significantly less than usual.

[GShock]

I've always questioned the usefulness of programming a good AI...in any game. Modern technologies allow fast, easy, cheap gaming with something better than any AI has ever been and probably will ever be: a human opponent. In AACW you don't even need a fast modem.

I think it's virtually impossible to program a better AI than this...it's just impossible. Yet with every patch it has become a more credible opponent. Then maybe it's not really impossible but just very very hard...my questioning on the usefulness comes after the efforts (in Dev time/human resources) compared to the results (on one side) and the possible goodies coming from the same efforts put elsewhere (bug squashing, improved graphics/musics, new features etc etc).

I don't doubt that this is a challenging experience for a developer. AI opponent does help selling the game but i don't think it's the ultimate reason for such efforts be put into it. Feels like a sort of personal quest of all devs onto something perhaps each of us dreamt many times: Terminator technology applied to Videogames (schwarzy included).

I am for example just now beginning the MP experience and i doubt i will ever go back to single player again.
Fooling the AI or exploiting its weakness is only a matter of experience and knowledge of the mechanics behind the AI curtains...if you can do that against a human opponent then it's totally another story and 10 times more gratifying.

PS I *am* being beaten savagely at my first pbem but i learned more about AACW in 4 days than in 3 months of AI play. Yet when i play vs the AI i always perform well. It does teach, it does make you sell the game but i think the real fun lies in MP

I am, having fun...even as i'm being beaten.

[humblelawstudent]

I'd love to get into some PBEM games, but I just don't have the time available on enough days. Some days I have plenty of time, others none at all. This would probably make for a frustrating PBEM game.

[ird]

I'd love to get into some PBEM games, but I just don't have the time available on enough days. Some days I have plenty of time, others none at all. This would probably make for a frustrating PBEM game.

That's my issue too - I think I'd soon annoy my opponent with times when I can send on turns and times when I can't

[arsan]

I don't doubt that this is a challenging experience for a developer. AI opponent does help selling the game but i don't think it's the ultimate reason for such efforts be put into it. Feels like a sort of personal quest of all devs onto something perhaps each of us dreamt many times: Terminator technology applied to Videogames (schwarzy included).

Well, my experience is just the opposite.
AGEOD, Panther Games and Stardock are the only developers who pride themselves with their AI developing.
The rest just put some basic and pathetic AI routines on the game and forget about it, using multilayer as an excuse

Cheers for AGEOD and the few developers who cares for AI!!
Hope they continue that way.
I would´t give a damn for PBEM even if i had the time for it!
Just my two cents

[richfed]

I, too, greatly appreciate the efforts put into making the AI a more difficult and complex opponent. It's not that I wouldn't enjoy a human opponent, but playing the AI affords one the chance to kick back, relax, and play when you want.

[tagwyn]

Shouldn't you be studying? I seldom had time for computer games when I was in Law School. Wash. U. of St. Louis. ???

[humblelawstudent]

tagwyn,

Then surely you remember that there are down times. Perhaps its why I'm not on law review. . .