I dont like ai allies...

[o_t_d_x]

One tip in helping "control" your AI allies.....

While you can't tell then "Attack this hex" what you can do is guide them........

To do so you need to properly support them with artillery/planes. Lay some fire on that victory hex and suppress/kill some strength points and who do you think the AI will go after? The now 12 str point infantry guarding the objective with minimal entrenchment and several suppressed strength points or the unit at full strength fully entrenched in the hills?

Its subtle and like herding cattle - they can't follow orders to the letter but they will take the path of least resistence

First - i am an iron man player - it brings much more emotions and challenge in the game. I am no reload and undo general. But if i loose a sure victory like that in iron man, i am very aggro.

How do you explain the following: 3 infantry units (full health) have arrived directly at the vic hex, the enemy is an anti air gun, that has no chance in close combat ag. inf.. I klick attack and the infantry leaves the city to march 2 turns ne. It seems that the ai wants the other far away vic hex, even if its unreachable. (at least 15 units block the way) And all of that in the last turns.

[o_t_d_x]

As frustrating as the AI controlled forces are at times I very much enjoyed this feature. As much as we all like to think of ourselves as Alexanders, Hannibals and Rommels the truth is no general has ever enjoyed the command and control we have over our troops and its a breath of fresh air to have to contend with orders not being followed exactly as I envisioned them in my head!

I don't know if anyone else remembers the old SPI games from the 70s, (Yeah I'm that old). Some of those games had a system that required you to roll a dice for certain units,, to see if you were even allowed to move that unit that turn. This was done to simulate command and control problems that in real life are always present on any battlefield.

I think the current system goes a long way towards simulating those command and control issues that the nationalists experienced in real life.

To be honest, it would be more realistic if every unit (including the German units) were subject to some level of command and control issues, but I can only imagine the howling that would ensue in this forum if players were not allowed perfect control over all their German units.

I don't remember those games exactly (may have played them when I was younger) but a few games had something similar over the years.

I think I'd go crazy if all my units acted like the Nationalists but you're right - it would be more realistic if all I could give was general commands!

Imagine being a corps commander - all I could do is tell my divisional commanders what I wanted them to achieve and not how to achieve it!

Easy design rule for realism: If realism increases fun, do it. If not, who the hell needs realism in a game that is faaaaaar away from commanding reality in ww2 ? (which by the way was very boring...with the exception of rommel at arras )
A realistic pc 2 wouldnt be funny: You klick at your new panther and get the message: "engine problems" tank is lost to enemy infantry.
Or: January 45: You proudly attack with your king tiger, after two turns the message: "no fuel left - tank is lost to enemy infantry.
Or you klick at "reinforce" in stalingrad and all you get is: "The führer personally ensures you reinforcements, maybe in 2 turns, or 5, or maybe 15 or maybe never. (6th army)
Or D-Day: You start with your Focke Wulf and you are instantly attacked by tousands of allied fighers. You have no chance, you cant win but hey its realistic.
Or you command your heroic infantry and suddenly they dissapear, because their love for the führer has been reduced drastically, so they decide to flee to the russians.
.
.
.
please no more ai controlled tropps in the real ww2 scenarios - this game is about controling your units - taking control away is not what many of us want - we are control freaks ... and if you must do it: give us more and better orders pl.

[Retributarr]

"o_t_d_x":... I personally can't know how 'Vexing' your situation is with 'Allies'...so I won't pretend too!... as my 'Computer & USB 3TB-Hard Drive went for a 'Hari-Kari' tour. I will find out soon since now the sunken-ship has been repaired.

From your anguished-plea... the only remedy that comes to mind Is that 'A few more player-delegated 'Command-Features' just might be in order... to complete and improve the symbiotic-relationship between the human and AI entities.

At "Stalingrad"... did "Von Paulus" have 'Full-Control'... or 'Any-Control' over his 'Allies' that were on his Northern and Southern peripheries?. No!...Absolutely-Not!.

At this very moment... I just recalled that "Field-Marshall-Rommel"... seemed to have some capacity to guide and control the "Italian Armee" in North-Afrika!. Maybe or perhaps some Ques/Ideas can be taken or emulated from that experience?... in order to improve the "Command & Control" of your "AI-Allies"???.

[econ21]

Spain is a bit different from Stalingrad or the Afrika Korps, in that the Condor Legion was supporting Franco's men. It doesn't really make sense to command them. By contrast, Rommel was in command of the Italians in the desert. I'm not sure about Von Paullus, but presumably he commanded the army in the city whereas his flanks were assigned to other formations. Having the Italians going off and doing their own thing at Alamein etc. would be odd. But fighting alongside an AI controlled flanking force sounds a good way to model some bigger battles if the player's core was small. (Big cores can get exhausting and slow down the campaign pace - I suspect quite a few people stop their GCs around 1943, partly for that reason. But also because the Russians start kicking ass, ofc.)

Ironically, the AI control of allies is making me itch to buy this DLC. I quite like reacting to the AI moves (e.g. I enjoy turtling in some of the defensive scenarios of the PzC GC). It can get a bit repetitive just blitzing all the time against a largely stationary enemy. Herding cats is my day job, so the prospect of having to cope with questionable allied moves doesn't faze me!

[nexusno2000]

Spain is a bit different from Stalingrad or the Afrika Korps, in that the Condor Legion was supporting Franco's men. It doesn't really make sense to command them. By contrast, Rommel was in command of the Italians in the desert. I'm not sure about Von Paullus, but presumably he commanded the army in the city whereas his flanks were assigned to other formations. Having the Italians going off and doing their own thing at Alamein etc. would be odd. But fighting alongside an AI controlled flanking force sounds a good way to model some bigger battles if the player's core was small. (Big cores can get exhausting and slow down the campaign pace - I suspect quite a few people stop their GCs around 1943, partly for that reason. But also because the Russians start kicking ass, ofc.)

Ironically, the AI control of allies is making me itch to buy this DLC. I quite like reacting to the AI moves (e.g. I enjoy turtling in some of the defensive scenarios of the PzC GC). It can get a bit repetitive just blitzing all the time against a largely stationary enemy. Herding cats is my day job, so the prospect of having to cope with questionable allied moves doesn't faze me!

It is even more exhausting to watch the AI play vs the AI, and do a string of incredibly dumb things. This is NOT why I sit down to play computer games

I'm at the Ebro now, and I can't have the AI fall back behind the river, nor can I have it send reinforcements forward to exposed crossing...

You've only 3 modes. If you HOLD, nothing happens OC. So worthless in this instance. Defend doesn't do anything useful. Exposed units stand and die, even attack. While the reserves clump towards objectives IN THE BACK. Lol. Attack is marginally more useful. For the most part it's the same as defend, but at least the reserves clump towards some objectives towards the front. Not the ones I need them to reach, but Ok. It's the least bad option.

Seville scenario is the most fun thus far. You know why? It has no AI controlled allies

[devoncop]

Spain is a bit different from Stalingrad or the Afrika Korps, in that the Condor Legion was supporting Franco's men. It doesn't really make sense to command them. By contrast, Rommel was in command of the Italians in the desert. I'm not sure about Von Paullus, but presumably he commanded the army in the city whereas his flanks were assigned to other formations. Having the Italians going off and doing their own thing at Alamein etc. would be odd. But fighting alongside an AI controlled flanking force sounds a good way to model some bigger battles if the player's core was small. (Big cores can get exhausting and slow down the campaign pace - I suspect quite a few people stop their GCs around 1943, partly for that reason. But also because the Russians start kicking ass, ofc.)

Ironically, the AI control of allies is making me itch to buy this DLC. I quite like reacting to the AI moves (e.g. I enjoy turtling in some of the defensive scenarios of the PzC GC). It can get a bit repetitive just blitzing all the time against a largely stationary enemy. Herding cats is my day job, so the prospect of having to cope with questionable allied moves doesn't faze me!

It is even more exhausting to watch the AI play vs the AI, and do a string of incredibly dumb things. This is NOT why I sit down to play computer games

I'm at the Ebro now, and I can't have the AI fall back behind the river, nor can I have it send reinforcements forward to exposed crossing...

You've only 3 modes. If you HOLD, nothing happens OC. So worthless in this instance. Defend doesn't do anything useful. Exposed units stand and die, even attack. While the reserves clump towards objectives IN THE BACK. Lol. Attack is marginally more useful. For the most part it's the same as defend, but at least the reserves clump towards some objectives towards the front. Not the ones I need them to reach, but Ok. It's the least bad option.

Seville scenario is the most fun thus far. You know why? It has no AI controlled allies

By way of contrast I am really enjoying the limited control.

For a start it is absolutely realistic. Try reading some accounts of the SCW and you will see the Nationalist forces were actually even less coordinated than these scenarios paint them between their own units let alone with the Condor Legion..

If you want total control you are playing the wrong set of scenarios. You are not however playing an inaccurate set.

I think they provide a great challenge and great fun.

Can't please all the people all of the time I guess.

[nexusno2000]

Realistic vs fun?

I don't play this game for realistic. It has none to begin with

But fun I agree depends on personal preference.

The AI allies were fun to begin with, I think. Great novelty value. But now I'm looking forward to 1939 DLC

[fluffybunnyuk]

You can always alter the script reward for map 1. So if you find the cache it rewards you with infantry....
Sorts out where to put that first aid hero, gives something to command with 2 legs, and 60 units still needs caring for (if you deployed 2 units with it).

[Retributarr]

It is even more exhausting to watch the AI play vs the AI, and do a string of incredibly dumb things. This is NOT why I sit down to play computer games

[Ret: Mussolini wanted to occupy the French and British colonies in Africa and seize control of the Suez Canal from the British. In August 1940, he ordered attacks on British positions in East Africa and Egypt.
Guess what "STUPID-ACTION" took place next???. The Italian Army advanced about 100km?... then set up fortified zones... all facing East to repel possible British counter attacks... while they were re-organizing. they failed to fortify their flanks or protect their rear areas!. Most of them in the end "Surrendered!". Isn't that "STUPID"???. ]

I'm at the Ebro now, and I can't have the AI fall back behind the river, nor can I have it send reinforcements forward to exposed crossing... [Ret: I agree!... some measure of "Greater-Control" should be seriously looked at!, this is just a little too ridiculous!.]

You've only 3 modes. If you HOLD, nothing happens OC. So worthless in this instance. Defend doesn't do anything useful. Exposed units stand and die, even attack. While the reserves clump towards objectives IN THE BACK. Lol. Attack is marginally more useful. For the most part it's the same as defend, but at least the reserves clump towards some objectives towards the front. Not the ones I need them to reach, but Ok. It's the least bad option. [Ret" Again!... there should be some kind of useful-practical deployment that they could take... instead of floundering around aimlessly like 'Mental-Patients' at a 'Funny-Farm'.]

Seville scenario is the most fun thus far. You know why? It has no AI controlled allies

If you want total control you are playing the wrong set of scenarios. You are not however playing an inaccurate set. [Ret: As far as my limited knowledge goes... I have never to my recollection have known of situations where 'Total-Control' of an ally was an actual event!.]

Can't please all the people all of the time I guess.

[kondi754]

I really like the scenarios when we have to use Nationalists as "cannon fodder", e.g. Corunna Road on the flanks
I consider commanding with 3 commands to be a brilliant solution, and SCW is a revolution in turn-based strategy game for me

I'm amused by requests for developers to give up their best idea
This game is not to adapt to you, but you are to adapt to the rules of the game !!! (to paraphrase JF Kennedy)

Someone wrote here that he's bored of watching the AI vs AI fight, then you probably haven't played Imphal scn in Burma Road DLC for OoB
(I think that's why I like SCW so much, because this game reminds me of OoB so much )

[Retributarr]

Someone wrote here that he's bored of watching the AI vs AI fight, then you probably haven't played Imphal scn in Burma Road DLC for OoB
(I think that's why I like SCW so much, because this game reminds me of OoB so much )

I agree!... the 'AI' independent units did a pretty good job on their own... even though I thought that the "AI's" competency in "Imphal scn in Burma Road DLC"... could still have been improved just a little-bit more.

That is the direction that I would like to see integrated into the already developed independent 'AI-Programing-Architecture'.

[KesaAnna]

On the one hand , the Spanish Civil War is a Nationalist show . You are only there to lend a hand. So , yes , it makes sense that you wouldn't be micro- managing Nationalist units as if they were Germans. Nationalist infantry are like your own pioneers , they are beastly , Rambo types . You wish you could incorporate the Army of Africa / the Moors into your own army ! And , when Nationalist units are utterly destroyed , it doesn't seem to matter . The Nationalists can lose 6 or 10 units in a scenario , and in the next scenario they show up with the same powerful infantry force as before. So I guess it is all no skin off your nose / it's all good ?

On the other hand , sorry , but one general order for ALL Nationalist units just doesn't make a lot of sense in many circumstances . The most blatant and obvious example I have seen of this so far is Toledo ;

The two northern wings of your relief force should attack.

But the southern wing of your army and the force defending Toledo should do anything but attack. The force defending Toledo needs to hunker down and survive. That's their job. In any case , the Republicans outnumber them three or four units to one. Any attack is suicide. They are under siege for a reason.

The southern wing of your army is even worse. Likewise they are outnumbered three or four units to one , and unlike the Toledo defense , they do not start in dug in defensive positions. It is suicide for them to attack.

Granted , I can still win the scenario by sweeping the north with my two northern wings. But it doesn't sit very well to see 6 or 7 Nationalist units in the south exterminated for no apparent reason or gain , and because I can only give ONE order to ALL units.

[Retributarr]

Yeeeaaauuuhhh!!!... what we have here is... "A-Failure-To-Communicate!":

Just a possibly "Useful-Suggestion"... come up with some-kind of method or procedure to give "Basic-General-Instructions" to different groups of Units!.

Call them or designate them as 'Aux-Task-Force-01,02,03... and so on. Be able to bring up these 'Auxiliary-Units' in a "Pop-Up-Screen" in order to review them or to make changes in their orders.

[kondi754]

I remembered an old puzzle: you have a well and 2 buckets of 3 and 5 liters at your disposal, you have to make there will be exactly 4 liters of water in a 5-liter bucket
I think commanding the Nationalists in SCW is a bit like this puzzle.
I'm 100 percent against splitting the Nationalists into some groups and separate commanding because that will be too easy then

[nexusno2000]

I remembered an old puzzle: you have a well and 2 buckets of 3 and 5 liters at your disposal, you have to make there will be exactly 4 liters of water in a 5-liter bucket
I think commanding the Nationalists in SCW is a bit like this puzzle.
I'm 100 percent against splitting the Nationalists into some groups and separate commanding because that will be too easy then

It's a puzzle all right.

The puzzle is: do you want to watch the AI play poorly against the AI, and find ways to work around that?

Or just play the game?

To add insult to injury supporting fire is bugged, and your allies steal your prestige

[Kerensky]

To add insult to injury supporting fire is bugged, and your allies steal your prestige

Shared Support is rather unfortunate, as are all of the minor hiccups that seems to have bled into the release version of the Spanish Civil War...

But they also feed you prestige from all hex captures as well as when they force an enemy unit to surrender. Sharing with your ally is a two way street.

[nexusno2000]

To add insult to injury supporting fire is bugged, and your allies steal your prestige

Shared Support is rather unfortunate, as are all of the minor hiccups that seems to have bled into the release version of the Spanish Civil War...

But they also feed you prestige from all hex captures as well as when they force an enemy unit to surrender. Sharing with your ally is a two way street.

Those hiccups adds to the feeling that you're not really in control of anything having to do with your allies. My fav bug: FOW descends when Rep unit takes a Nat flag

I bet the Republicans eat x10 more prestige than they bring in...at least.

[kondi754]

I remembered an old puzzle: you have a well and 2 buckets of 3 and 5 liters at your disposal, you have to make there will be exactly 4 liters of water in a 5-liter bucket
I think commanding the Nationalists in SCW is a bit like this puzzle.
I'm 100 percent against splitting the Nationalists into some groups and separate commanding because that will be too easy then

It's a puzzle all right.

The puzzle is: do you want to watch the AI play poorly against the AI, and find ways to work around that?

Or just play the game?

To add insult to injury supporting fire is bugged, and your allies steal your prestige

The thing is, I can't see this
My Nationalists are more than decent on the battlefield and I'm very pleased with them
Do we play 2 different games?
As I wrote before - SCW is similar to OoB and I believe immodestly that I'm one of the better players in OoB, maybe my experience with OoB allows me to manage these troops so well?

[Kerensky]

The thing is, I can't see this
My Nationalists are more than decent on the battlefield and I'm very pleased with them
Do we play 2 different games?
As I wrote before - SCW is similar to OoB and I believe immodestly that I'm one of the better players in OoB, maybe my experience with OoB allows me to manage these troops so well?

I would be lying if my experience with Panzer Corps AI, OOB AI, and Panzer Corps 2 base game AI all didn't help to influence Spanish Civil War AI settings and workings.

Truth be told, I personally enjoyed the novelty of AI Allies in OOB. But it is equally true that eventually it did bother me that all they did was run through their pre-configured script. It does indeed devolve into 'watching AI fight AI'. Panzer Corps 2 at least allowing some high level commanding is a step towards continuing to innovate and also put some player agency back into the equation of AI vs AI combat.

Panzer Corps 2's AI management isn't perfect, and ideally will be improved by the next time in shows up in a future DLC. Just the progression of innovation for this game genre and franchises we all clearly adore.

[kondi754]

The thing is, I can't see this
My Nationalists are more than decent on the battlefield and I'm very pleased with them
Do we play 2 different games?
As I wrote before - SCW is similar to OoB and I believe immodestly that I'm one of the better players in OoB, maybe my experience with OoB allows me to manage these troops so well?

I would be lying if my experience with Panzer Corps AI, OOB AI, and Panzer Corps 2 base game AI all didn't help to influence Spanish Civil War AI settings and workings.

Truth be told, I personally enjoyed the novelty of AI Allies in OOB. But it is equally true that eventually it did bother me that all they did was run through their pre-configured script. It does indeed devolve into 'watching AI fight AI'. Panzer Corps 2 at least allowing some high level commanding is a step towards continuing to innovate and also put some player agency back into the equation of AI vs AI combat.

Panzer Corps 2's AI management isn't perfect, and ideally will be improved by the next time in shows up in a future DLC. Just the progression of innovation for this game genre and franchises we all clearly adore.

Yes, I know all of that
But this two games have something else in common, some undefined model of how units move on the map, which rewards players who play intuitively, their play is task-oriented and not schematically
To this day, I'm not able to define what it is about, except that it suits me very well