Which is best AI?

[HugoBardo]

Hi, after some too easy game from both sides, what is your opinion about AI? Which is the best one and more difficult for you and can you explain your reason?

 

Thanks!

[R.E.B.Blunt]

I can beat the game on any of the difficulties with both Union and Confederate. I play on Determined Difficulty every time. It is the most challenging.

 

That said, I do think it is easier to play as Union if you can survive till day two. They outnumber the Rebels and they have better Cannons. Holding the high ground is a added bonus.

 

When playing as Rebels you have to murder the crap out of the Union in day one. You have to force them as far south as possible before they bring up the other 3 Corps with a total of 5 corps. If not they will just overwhelm you with sheer numbers.

[David Fair]

The AI is improving with each release iteration.

Right now as the Union the CSA AI loses in Phase 2 unless I hold back the Union forces.

As the CSA the Union AI usually loses in Phase 4 when the CSA takes Cemetery Ridge.

The campaign ending is based on the flow from one Phase to the next.

If the CSA AI does not take any VP locations in the first two phases they lose the campaign.

If the Union AI does not hold any VP locations in the first four phases they lose the campaign.

It is my understanding the battle flow issue from Phase to Phase is being worked. It will take some time.

[CmdrMctoast]

Spot on with the comments but I adjust my play style to always try different things from game to game and

battle to battle with the intent to not repeat my outcomes, be redundant or utilize exploits.

I will as time goes by try to expose exploits and point them out to have them ironed out of the game but im having

way to much fun right now.

[Pierre]

Determined is definitely the best.  They don't suicide charge they exploit opportunities.  Other modes usually have parts of the AI army be unnecessarily cautious allowing you to beat them piecemeal.

[MikeK]

Thanks for the information that Determined is the most challenging.  I might have thought a less aggressive setting would be, as more likely to concentrate force more.

 

Assuming that Cunning and Dynamic can also be as relatively effective in their way as Determined, I'd like to see in the game the option to set difficulty but randomize aggressiveness.

[subunit]

Assuming that Cunning and Dynamic can also be as relatively effective in their way as Determined, I'd like to see in the game the option to set difficulty but randomize aggressiveness.

 

Yeah, agree with this- I don't use Random because I don't want to waste time with the easier difficulty levels, but if it was possible to restrict the difficulty levels Random choses from, I would use it.

[David Fair]

When I've played against the Determined AI my observation is that it is fine for the early Phases.

But as the game wears on Determined results in very heavy casualties for the AI and the game becomes progressively easier.

I stopped playing with the AI on Determined when the CSA had 40,000 casualties and were still attacking aggressively.

It's like the AI needs to switch between characteristics.  

Start on Determined but when casualties hit X or the CSA captures Y VP location then they should dial it down to Cunning.

[soccercw]

Yeah, agree with this- I don't use Random because I don't want to waste time with the easier difficulty levels, but if it was possible to restrict the difficulty levels Random choses from, I would use it.

Would be a great option.  A simple check box list that allows you to select multiple AI personalities it can randomly choose from.  Allows the more advanced player to not waste his time with the beginner level AI while still not knowing what to expect early on

[MikeK]

It's like the AI needs to switch between characteristics.  

A fine idea.  That switching MIGHT be appropriate sector by sector (defending in one, attacking desperately in another, probing elsewhere).  That's what (most) players do, though we all know a player who is a McClellan or a Hood all the time.

[Husserl]

The switching AI was in the initial plans. It is not permanently withdrawn from the table and it's possible to be implemented sometime in the future. 

[MikeK]

Thank you for your consideration of the switching AI issue. I imagine managing a changeover in approach is what would require the most coding.  

 

 

The set-up flexibility in randomizing the AI discussed above would add some useful uncertainty and would seem to be a UI-only issue.

 

One possibly related question - what aspects of the game does the Randomize toggle in the custom battle menu randomize? Just the AI?

[Edgy]

I've been testing it quite a lot with the Union on cautious, because that's more or less what Meade was during the actual battle. Lee was very good at getting inside the opposing commanders head, so I believe cautious is a good test of the games AI. So far it has validated the AI, because on cautious the Union (with a few exceptions) behave as they did at Gettysburg.

[MikeK]

I've been testing it quite a lot with the Union on cautious, because that's more or less what Meade was during the actual battle. Lee was very good at getting inside the opposing commanders head, so I believe cautious is a good test of the games AI. So far it has validated the AI, because on cautious the Union (with a few exceptions) behave as they did at Gettysburg.

Cautious, not Cunning?

[Aldemar]

I played with Balanced alot.