I was just playing Middle Earth on the latest AAA version. It seemed like the hard Evil AI wasn't quite aggressive enough. Other than that, they seemed to play very well, so thanks for all the hard work!
I really think the mechanics are a very cool concept... I care much less about the iconography... so if there is ever some consensus on what you need/want... just gimme me a nudge. I'm never that far away.
@redrum another test game attached: vs_ai.tsvg
AI had some pretty good play. Eventually Japan blundered in round 5 effectively handing the game to allies. AI could have made some other good moves, notes below:
Round 1: Germany allows 2 AA to be in Germany, it may as well move the AA to eastern europe or to Balkans
Round 2: single tank attack at likely negative net PU. Could conquer West Russia with tank and then retreat
Round 4: germany used 2 tanks to attack Karelia, bad trade-off as UK can take the units. Losing 10 PU for max likely trade of 8 PU (Germany kills one infantry (+3), territory capture (+2), and likely kills one infantry on defense (+3))
Round 4: Germany non-combat, moves big tank stack without infantry cover
Round 4: Japan leaves undefended AA gun in India
Round 5: 2 tanks and bomber attack archangel, should probably be one tank
Round 5: BLUNDER: Japan divides fleet and loses most of it to a 99% combat with +60 TUV expected for Americans.
Round 8: 2 tanks taking siankang, excessive.
Round 11: Germany retake of Western europe with 1 arty and 2 figs. Should use 2 infantry with figs.
@Hepps I recall that, back then during early development, I reiterately tried to have Imbaked making the gas into a tech, like tanks. Instead, he insisted that he wanted gas available since start game, but I don't recall what was his reason for it. The problem with techs that unlock units is that they have a fixed cost for unlocking, thus they induce spam, by making the unit relatively less expensive the more you buy it (as the research cost will be divided amongst more TUV, lowering the markup). So, basically, the risk is that either the tech is not good to get or once you get it you need to spam it a lot to make it worthwhile. This is likely the root of the problem of the current NML Mustard Gas and Working Women tech combo.
With this said, unless the map goes a bit the way of Civil War, and you have manpower vs manufacture, so that, for example, you cannot spend all your income in spamming infantry (hence the gas would be alternative to other materials, not much to infantry, reducing the need of having a quite strict mathematical comparison between the TUV cost of the gas and the TUV cost of the infantries it is going to grind down), I would rather suggest gas being limited by the number of targets, that would represent the fact that is not a weapon of annihilation. Regular gas may hit at 1 and mustard gas at 2 (and possibly another level of gas that hits at 3), and only infantry or infantry-like units, with possible maximum rolls limited to the number of targets (as said). However, the problem with this is that, then, you may end up just sending exactly a number of gas equal to the maximum hits you can roll, each time, that would be some dumb management. The best would be that gas has a sort of mechanics that becomes less and less effective the more you use it on a same target, and the more effective the bigger the target.
i think to remove randomness in this game is like poker with an ordered deck. Sure the hands will be very orderly but by taking the randomness out of it you are really taking a fundamental aspect of game out of the picture. Part of your strategy should be to allow for things to go against you imo.
That being said i do understand why people like LL and a version of it the effect of it were always even would be interesting to try at least.
also, this over rolling of 1's and 2's, this is the first ive heard of that. here is 14 round 6 sided game stats as well as a 28 round 12 sider stats they look pretty good to me.
@redrum right well the attacker never gets to choose the casualties so i was just using that as a comparison. if the defender should always be able to choose the best scramble returns it really wouldn't be any worse than that.