Slitherine

When this game was first released I didn't buy because of AI complaints. I'm looking at this game again mostly because of the Russian Campaigns. Have there been any AI improvements over the years?
Thanks for any opinions.

I've only had OOB for six months so don't know about earlier versions, and although the AI is not perfect, it's not bad..
For the record, over my 35 years of computer gaming I've never seen any game whose AI could be called 'great', but OOB's AI is certainly better than most.
For example OOB's AI usually senses which of our units are weak or in a vulnerable position and will send in a feeding frenzy of attackers to bleed it white with several attacks in one turn. Likewise if you stick a units neck out too far, the AI will often deliberately surround it to cut off its supply.

Below: THE AI WHUPPED ME YESTERDAY and I'm still in shock!!
Left pic:- It was the Blitzkrieg > Moscow scenario, I captured Istra with my Germans and set up a nice infantry screen in front of it, but forgot to put a unit in the town itself, so the AI decided to target my blue-circled unit and blow a hole in my line, what cheek!
Right pic:- Firstly the AI sent a T-34 to bleed my unit bad (1), then it sent an infantry unit to bleed it some more (2) which forced it to retreat into Istra on its last legs, then it sent a flamethrowing tank to finish it off (3), and the tank then advanced into town and the "DEFEAT" endgame message came up and I staggered into the kitchen on the point of fainting to make myself a cup of hot sweet tea!

I have a hunch Spike's AARs would be really enjoable read not to mention educational to all new players.

As for the AI I'd say it is quite good in OoB, but much rests with the designer.

Unfortunately, we're a long time away from a (commercially available) AI that can weight multiple complicated decisions and take the best course of action- in OOB's case, for an independent AI, you need something that can decide whether to use resources to reinforce or to buy new units, to sacrifice or save a unit, to rest to regain efficiency or to move and block the way to allow other units to rest, where to deploy, etc.

Good news is progress is being made and we've reached the point where AIs can learn and decide best course of action for simpler games like chess (not use brute power to beat the player but learning from past mistakes). However, as you increase the factors the AI will need to consider, you're exponentially scaling resources and programming to account for each additional decision tree that will interact with the rest.

Until then, scripting can take care of the most complicated decisions, and reasonably good tactical AI (which OOB one is) can take care of the rest.

Speaking of AI in all games in general including OOB, I've long thought that perhaps programmers should tell AI units what NOT to do.
For example we often see weak badly beat-up units commit suicide by attacking when they should have withdrawn to get replacements instead.
Surely programmers could incorporate a simple line of text telling them NOT to attack when weak?

PoorOldSpike wrote:Surely programmers could incorporate a simple line of text telling them NOT to attack when weak?

In OoB it's the AI Team's "aggression" setting used in the scenario editor.

GabeKnight wrote:

PoorOldSpike wrote:Surely programmers could incorporate a simple line of text telling them NOT to attack when weak?

In OoB it's the AI Team's "aggression" setting used in the scenario editor.

Yeah but that setting is fixed throughout the scenario, it's fine for making fullstrength units ruthlessly keep attacking, but the downside is that it'll make them still continue attacking even when their strength and efficiency is low, and get they'll wiped out.
A line of programming text is needed telling them NOT to attack if their strength and/or efficiency drops to say below 50 percent.

PS- I've also noticed in OOB that some AI units DO withdraw if their strength is low, but instead of getting replacs in the rear, they come back a few turns later still at their weak strength! Crazy!

PoorOldSpike wrote:PS- I've also noticed in OOB that some AI units DO withdraw if their strength is low, but instead of getting replacs in the rear, they come back a few turns later still at their weak strength! Crazy!

That's because the AI has very few RPs to repair units (in stock scenarios). A human player would probably be better in using such weak units but would be forced to do the same in such a situation.

CoolDTA wrote:

PoorOldSpike wrote:PS- I've also noticed in OOB that some AI units DO withdraw if their strength is low, but instead of getting replacs in the rear, they come back a few turns later still at their weak strength! Crazy!

That's because the AI has very few RPs to repair units (in stock scenarios).

Yeah, they get like 0-3 RP/turn usually. But if the AI has enough RP available, they repair like crazy, believe me!

PoorOldSpike wrote:A line of programming text is needed telling them NOT to attack if their strength and/or efficiency drops to say below 50 percent.

Actually that's something the scenario designers have to implement themselves using triggers. I've seen it done multiple times in stock scenarios.
(AI team split / exit the map)

Yeah, the designer is in control of how aggressive/suicidal/cowardly they want the units to be.

The AI then interprets those orders situationally. So If I've told an AI group to attack with no let up, the AI will indeed throw them against your lines, but if I've set them to be less aggressive, then they might just surround your lines and only pick off targets of opportunity.

In recent DLC's you'll see units falling back from the lines when damaged due to a relatively new team split trigger, but it's up to the designer to determine whether they should replenish, withdraw or recommit

GabeKnight wrote: But if the AI has enough RP available, they repair like crazy, believe me!

I'm sure they do. From what I gather some user-made scenarios have much more RPs allocated to the AI than the stock ones.