Move mechanics for German allies units

[Vorskl]

I am wondering what's the dominant public opinion on move mechanics of German allies units (i.e Slovaks, Hungarian, Italians)?
The upcoming DLCs - East 1942, 1943 + whatever North Africa will obviously be heavy on these.

So far in the game, we've seen three principal ways:
- let player indirectly guide them - SCW. A very accurately historically, but apparently many players hate the script quality (but I personally found it interesting and good; this mechanics simulates lower quality of German allies and less than perfect (i.e. real-life) execution).
- fully autonomous, self-scripted like Rommel in 1940. IMHO the worst as there is no way to coordinate the battle
- full control like mobile airfields in 1941. The least historical but probably highly appreciated, especially by the novice players

Are there any other interesting ideas?

[Bee1976]

Are there any other interesting ideas?

I would prefer the SCW System. I know its quite unpopular, and ppl use mods to alter their behavior. But i enjoyed the System, the quite "unpredictable" behavior of my spanish friends and the challenges of keeping them alive and support them.

I dislike using non core troops as aux units. There is a trait, i some1 wants aux units. But with gifted and free aux units, i bet most player will use them as meat-wall. Just my thought on this.

[Kerensky]

- fully autonomous, self-scripted like Rommel in 1940. IMHO the worst as there is no way to coordinate the battle

But in this case, players can at least plan around what their allies are doing, as long as they know what their allies are doing (through briefing explanations).

Spanish Civil War feature to issue general orders was unique, and appropriate to that conflict. It's a really neat way to reflect how Spanish, German, and Italians were all on the same side, but not all completely unified or equivalent. The mixed reaction to that system pretty much ensured it will stay as the default non-modded version of that campaign, as much as it ensured that particular system didn't make a return after Spanish Civil War.

[adiekmann]

I am wondering what's the dominant public opinion on move mechanics of German allies units (i.e Slovaks, Hungarian, Italians)?
The upcoming DLCs - East 1942, 1943 + whatever North Africa will obviously be heavy on these.

So far in the game, we've seen three principal ways:
- let player indirectly guide them - SCW. A very accurately historically, but apparently many players hate the script quality (but I personally found it interesting and good; this mechanics simulates lower quality of German allies and less than perfect (i.e. real-life) execution).
- fully autonomous, self-scripted like Rommel in 1940. IMHO the worst as there is no way to coordinate the battle
- full control like mobile airfields in 1941. The least historical but probably highly appreciated, especially by the novice players

Are there any other interesting ideas?

For large scale operations involving lots of units, I prefer the Rommel/7. Panzer version. I do not want to micromanage large numbers of aux units that I have little invested interest. If they are few units in number, then I'm okay with full control. If they are set up where they get quickly crushed like was often the case in many PC1 GC scenarios, then it doesn't much matter either way.

For a N. Africa campaign, I would like full control, but I would also like them to be not aux but core (Italian) units. I'd like some design feature that would make them unavoidable since I'm someone who leans much more on the historical side of things.

[VirgilInTheSKY]

I'm for autonomous, as long as their objective are simple enough to not cause trouble (push forward to specific locations, hold position, go for VH), I am willing to let them do that on themselves and not take time managing everything myself. A few useful aux is fine, many but no need to take care of like in Klin is also ok, but a whole frontline? I'm not the general in their command, really, and when compared to the base game campaign where you have to do everything yourself, I prefer having an AI to take care of those from another division, or another country. Of course I am willing to provide support if needed, but they have to do the other thing on themselves.

[Stephen1024]

My honest opinion is simply I enjoyed all content. I also don't wish block possibilities. So I am happy with AI commanding troops where and when appropriate. That's said I wouldn't want it be in every battle and every dlc.

If anyone thinks about afrika corps grand campaign, the working together both italian and German forces this would be great place for it. Would I destroy a possible grand campaign over 1 feature no. I think it could do with improving AI tactics so we all don't need micro manage it all the time. Yet I say to I wouldn't want AI to be perfect. Army's working together never going be perfect.

Another answer I would give is a good general will work wonders with what they are given. So maybe look at in as way to improve yourself and your battlefield abilities not just as negative.

Kerensky and all done great job. Also thanks for trying sort paratroopers out. Please just keep content coming. Don't mind what or where it goes. People's general, Pacific etc more the better. Is there way to change colour of dots on maps for moves. White on snowy map sucks getting to old. Really would appreciate it thanks.

[Panzer73]

I'm definitely in the minority in this one, but I would prefer the SCW system with a little improvement. The only trouble I found with the SCW system is that I would like to be able to tell the AI where to go or which VH to defend.

My first play through I lost a lot of prestige because of the AI's behavior and I couldn't influence where the AI was going. I figured out how to influence the AI's movements (which VH to go to) for my three following playthroughs, and it wasn't so bad after that...

[IceSerpent]

The issue is that AI is simply not up to the task. Granted, formalizing the appropriate behavior is not easy - the game mechanics make it easy for human, but complicated for an algorithm. However, the current script is just plain bad. Defending with infantry in the open terrain right next to a hill, trying to push flak / arty to the front lines, parking strength 1 tank next to the enemy pillbox, etc.
Conceptually, both SCW and Rommel versions are historical. After all, 7th panzer didn't get the "ghost division" nickname for coordinating with the rest of the forces. That being said, full player control feels more historically accurate than the other two, because the alternative is closer to herding cats than working with any kind of an army, even a really bad one.

[nexusno2000]

I'm playing a turn based game vs AI. I'm just not interested in watching the AI VS AI. If it was less dumb (edit: the AI isn't bad overall, pretty good actually, but not up to the task). or would be less painful, but still not ideal.

My fav way of playing SCW is picking Aux Force and using my allies as little as possible.

[DarkBlueInk]

I like the variety of all 3. I didn't like the limited control in SCW until I learned how to use it better after a few play-throughs and watching videos of others playing the scenarios. My only issue with Rommel is how the AI puts units in the worst possible hexes, suicide attacks, and support units acting as assault units. My hope is this gets better over time. But I am really enjoying the game as a whole so far.

[CaesarCzech]

i would actually suggest aping red Alert 3 in that there needs to be some triggers that player can use to direct them so if you are want them to flank or go throught center etc. perhaps have option of choosing from several battle plans.

[Stephen1024]

i would actually suggest aping red Alert 3 in that there needs to be some triggers that player can use to direct them so if you are want them to flank or go throught center etc. perhaps have option of choosing from several battle plans.

Interesting idea have more options for them. Have to admit I like idea having Italian units in my core, that said having AI controlled Italian force in Africa campaign be nice and more accurate especially if had few more options for orders we could give. So yeah so many possibilities.

[Wolfenguard]

Mhh difficult question.
There are some situations where I think o no dis can't be why make the ai this or this instead of this.
Like in scw enemy in a pocket and have the debut. Ai moved a unit to attack an other unit. But opens the pocket. The enemy lose the debuff and the air send an other unit to the starting position of the first to close the pocket and attack.

I think I prefer the system from the ao 39 aso instead of the scw. Especially the air don't burn trough my prestige and I know a little better with the ai will do. Like units health at 50% retreating to point x for refitting aso.

From my viewing a complete new system will be great maybe for pc3 with a new aux force system. Fixed aux force which will be part of your Forces trough the complete campaign part. At some point you can choose with aux force joins you in battle like mixed inf and tanks, air only or ships. With the aux force trait you have access to more aux forces or get better equipped aux forces.

[Rhaeg]

Personally I think it all depends on the situation. In the Spanish Civil War it made sense you weren't commanding the Spanish troops, so directing them through the allied AI system they implemented was a nice way to coordinate with your Spanish allies. In the 1940 scenarios it seemed like we were of a similar rank as Rommel so we wouldn't be able to command each other, instead only coordinating through the pre-battle briefing. So I think that made sense too. It's a bit vague how far up we are supposed to be in the command structure in 1942 when fighting alongside the Hungarians, but I guess since we were basically only commanding a Luftflotte it makes sense too that we wouldn't be able to command the AI troops. So as long as it makes some sense in the context of the story, I'm ok with things.

One thing I'd like to note that I think did not work well in the Hungarian air support scenario (and possibly the Stalingrad one as well, I don't remember if it was an issue there too) : in this scenario the Soviet AI moved after us before our allied AI, which means all your suppression due to your strategic bombers is useless since the soviet suppression resets on start of their turn. I'd really suggest switching turn order of the enemy and allied AIs due to this.

[brumleek]

Greetings everyone.

Since any coordination between divisions, armies or allied forces must have been painful during WW2 in general, I'm fine with any approach displayed so far. Personally, I'm not a big fan of manual control of bigger allied forces myself (like Kursk scenario in the vanilla campaign), but I will survive it (to an extent ) and it gives me the opportunity to play/explore units I usually tend to ignore.

What I would like to see improved is AI behavior in general. I admit I'm not paying extra attention to AI patterns but a few possible ones emerged to me.

Pattern one:
AI is probably using fixed unit type rotation during its turn. All airplanes, all arty, all infantry, all armored units etc... This seems quite inefficient - for example openings made by infantry can not be further explored by air force because air force already moved (and unloaded its "freedom load" pointlessly or not at all). I've seen countless times similar sequence:
- Soviet airplane comes above my force and realizes it will be obliterated by my AAs if it decides to attack. So it "parks" itself without attack action performed. A good AI decision in my book.
- Soviet infantry flanks my core and decimates my overlooking flak to 1/3 of its strength. A really good "tin opener" move.
- My AA threat to "parked" enemy airplane ceased to exist by previous Soviet infantry action but Soviet airplane will not use its attack action now, because AI decided to forfeit this attack during "airplane action turn". And that's where all the AI effort is wasted.

Pattern two:
AI attack + move routine (however inefficient it may be) is making me:
- Cry during SCW (remembering Ebro) where even an insane number of AI controlled allies are not able to capture, secure, and expand around objectives surrounded by difficult terrain (rivers mainly) just because first attack-successful (and often pretty decimated) AI controlled unit just have to advance to a "liberated" spot, denying all other full-strength and attack-ready units around the possibility.
- Smile when enemy AI decimates itself again and again in the same manner against my troops.

Pattern three:
AI armor ignoring close terrain, loving to park inside cities just beside open terrain spots generously provided by the Devs (6th army in Stalingrad - I'm looking at you!).

I understand I'm "crying about" AI behavior deep inside the game core, probably very difficult to change so feel free to ignore me .

[Panzer73]

I understand I'm "crying about" AI behavior deep inside the game core, probably very difficult to change so feel free to ignore me .

I seriously doubt it cannot be changed - just play the Hannut scenario in AO'40. The AI plays much more intelligently there, moving 4-8 units first, then going back to the starting unit to start the attack sequences - it even rotates between the French and Belgium AIs during the sequence, so the two allies look like they are collaborating. Therefore, it launches pretty devastating attacks. It also seems to set up traps. The DLCs would be significantly more difficult if the AI followed the same pattern in all scenarios.

[brumleek]

I understand I'm "crying about" AI behavior deep inside the game core, probably very difficult to change so feel free to ignore me .

I seriously doubt it cannot be changed - just play the Hannut scenario in AO'40. The AI plays much more intelligently there, moving 4-8 units first, then going back to the starting unit to start the attack sequences - it even rotates between the French and Belgium AIs during the sequence, so the two allies look like they are collaborating. Therefore, it launches pretty devastating attacks. It also seems to set up traps. The DLCs would be significantly more difficult if the AI followed the same pattern in all scenarios.

Hmmm interesting, I stand corrected. AO1942 patch is still in making, perhaps it is time to start a new playthrough from SCW scratch, think about each scenario, and make some simple AI behavior statistics. Thanks for reminding me.

[CaesarCzech]

i think solution might be to modify pattern one with additional miscelaneous phase where ai will once again look at all units it has and recheck what is possible, since by this moment it should have reduced number of actions it can perform it should be quick.
Another improvement might be to allow ai to think in advance so not only will it calculate the odds of action but the odds of action if another action is performed before it. this way it should allow for stuff like artilery suppresion and then using infantry. basically calculate two moves.