AI Suitability

TorpedoA

@cernel
Youre right. Its not fitting. But at this stage of this personal mod, i only want a first look at my unit structure, unit images, gameplay of AI etc.

If i would consider this a map for download, which i am miles away from being certain about, then i would go for another map for sure.

About the America in ancient times.
Well, i read a very intresting book.....
The Carthagians together with people of the iberian peninsula (spain) are suspect of being adventurers/colonizers going to the amazon up to the andes mountains after going over the atlantic by natural streams. You do not have to do alot to go from west afrika to the northern brasilian coast. We know that the carthagians were masters of the sea. And there are archeological sites and artefacts found which are obviously mediterran culture.
There was even a documentation on TV years ago.

America on ancient time maps doesnt irritate me.

RogerCooper

@schulz We need to investigate the cause of the passivity of the AI. If removing the AA capability of general units solves the issue, then we know what the problem is. However, AA is used other scenarios for special attacks, so that may not be the issue.

Cernel

@torpedoa I've never heard of any theory about the Punics getting to South America. I guess these are very recent theories.

RogerCooper

@torpedoa
We are getting off topic here, but this is interesting.

The ships of the ancient Mediterranean were poorly suited for ocean voyages. Their low freeboard made them vulnerable to storms. Recall how many fleets were sunk by storm in the First Punic War (including the transports)

We know from Herodotus that the Phoenicians circumnavigated Africa, but that would be a coastal voyage. Of course, one ship could get lucky but we have no ancient account of a voyage to the Americas or archaeological evidence. For that matter there is no sign of the Carthaginians doing anything significant south of the Sahara.

Crossing oceans reliably requires sturdy ships with like those of the Vikings or the Polynesians with their catamarans.

Interestingly, Plato's account of Atlantis has many points in common with Carthage (large circular seaport, elephants). Plato probably got some ideas for Atlantis from merchants who had sailed to Carthage.

Of course, it is your scenario and every wargame is alternate history after the first turn (or maybe before).

TorpedoA

Well. We dont know for sure. Yes of course you may have to have some luck. But i think it was possible even then to try and make it. The therory has some weak points, but also some good ones i think. But still the journey is not that of a wild idea. Even the mediterran ocean is not a shallow, harmless water.

I am from Germany and i didnt find a english versions.
But if you like some impressions.

This one is older and not as detailed afaik.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xk4LOmSIXlY

This one i think is the most recent one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zy5tX_hVOCs

And some wiki on this strange culture.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chachapoya_culture

RogerCooper

@torpedoa The Chachapoya are interesting but I see no connection to Carthage. Lucky voyages can occur but colonizing implies a sustained effort, which was beyond their technological capability. It would also be odd for the Carthaginians to pass through the coastal regions and end up in the Andes mountains.

An interesting comparison would be the Vikings in North America. They had ships that could cross the Atlantic, but Iceland lacked the population base or the technological superiority to develop a lasting colony. (The Viking tendency murder everyone they met was an additional problem. Read the Vinland sagas.).

beelee

@rogercooper said in AI Suitability:

@torpedoa (The Viking tendency murder everyone they met was an additional problem...).

LOL

TorpedoA

@rogercooper said in AI Suitability:

colonizing implies a sustained effort, which was beyond their technological capability. It would also be odd for the Carthaginians to pass through the coastal regions and end up in the Andes mountains.

Well, you wont find a city-state-like megapolis like Charthage with 500.000-750.000 peoples and a huge harbor in the Andes mountains if thats what you meant by "beyond their tech capabilties".

If you ship the Amazon upstream, are you not going to end up anywhere near the eastern flank of the mountains there? Eventually i misspointed the region, because its not the Andes itself i guess then.
But, would be no problem if they could ship the mediterran and atlantic ocean already.

TorpedoA

Back to topic. Because some questions.

I guess the AI will go for the closest enemy capital?

What would happen if i would make all owned territories capitals?

RogerCooper

@torpedoa said in AI Suitability:

Back to topic. Because some questions.

I guess the AI will go for the closest enemy capital?

What would happen if i would make all owned territories capitals?

I am not sure, but I suspect that the AI would lack strategic direction as every area is as good as any other.

RogerCooper

@torpedoa said in AI Suitability:

Well, you wont find a city-state-like megapolis like Charthage with 500.000-750.000 peoples and a huge harbor in the Andes mountains if thats what you meant by "beyond their tech capabilties".

Sailing open ocean, with nights out of sight of shore is technical ability the Carthaginians did not have. Their boats were not sturdy enough, and they lacked navigation techniques. The Carthaginians went as far as Great Britain, but that could be done entirely by sailing in sight of shore. I suspect that the trade with Britain involved intermediaries like the Veneti, who developed sturdier sailing craft (see Caesar's the Gallic War).

There is reason why it was the Spanish (sailing from a port once part of Carthaginian territory) were able to settle the New World while the Carthaginians didn't. Technology had developed extensively in 1,700 years in between.

RogerCooper

@schulz said in AI Suitability:

@rogercooper Could you take a look for Aggression 1941?

When I removed the isAAforCombat property, the AI became much more aggressive. I don't why that property was even there, it is superfluous for non-infrastructure. There was no place that actually defined the AA ability.

Look at this unit. Offense & defense are explicitly defined.

    <attachment name="unitAttachment" attachTo="EscortCarrierASWX" javaClass="games.strategy.triplea.attachments.UnitAttachment" type="unitType">
      <option name="movement" value="2"/>
      <option name="isSea" value="true"/>
      <option name="attack" value="1"/>
      <option name="defense" value="1"/>
      <option name="isAAforCombatOnly" value="true"/>
      <option name="mayOverStackAA" value="true"/>
      <option name="offensiveAttackAA" value="1"/>
      <option name="attackAA" value="1"/>
      <option name="maxAAattacks" value="1"/>
      <option name="targetsAA" value="submarine"/>
      <option name="isDestroyer" value="false"/>
      <option name="carrierCapacity" value="1"/>                       <option name="blockade" value="0"/>
      <option name="canBeGivenByTerritoryTo" value="British"/>
    </attachment>

Schulz

@rogercooper Thank you so much, AI now so much better after removing isAAforCombat property.

I'am actually favor of creating a new property called "AI compatibilty" instead of adding additional XML. When this property will be selected, some features like blockade zones, bombing/intercept will be deactivated. Not sure if it is possible.

RogerCooper

@schulz What were you trying to accomplish with the isCombatAA property. Did you want all attacking air to be subject to an AA attack? Defending air as well?

Schulz

@rogercooper Probably when i had wanted to give all units (except transports) AA protection, they initially became immobile and i though adding isCombatAA is the only way to make them mobile again.

TorpedoA

@schulz
Although this isnt part of your consideration, it is at least somehow related and eventually you could use it elswhere whenever you encounter that phenomenon.
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/2562/funny-trigger-to-help-trick-the-ai-to-amphibiously-noncombat-move-isaa-units

RogerCooper

@schulz Maybe the solution is to make them offensive AA with a combat value of 0. Or maybe 1 so capitals don't get defended by masses of aircraft

Schulz

@rogercooper I don't know how do i do that without changing any feature. I don't know too why AI has tendency to send transport unprotected.

Currently it looks like playable against Axis AI with an income bonus, I'am trying to figure out to remove some features via triggers to make it fully compatible with single player.

RogerCooper

@schulz said in AI Suitability:

@rogercooper I don't know how do i do that without changing any feature. I don't know too why AI has tendency to send transport unprotected.

Currently it looks like playable against Axis AI with an income bonus, I'am trying to figure out to remove some features via triggers to make it fully compatible with single player.

A simple solution to the transport problem is to give transports a defense strength of 1, as in the early editions of A&A,

I would suggest having 2 different xml's rather than trying to fuss with triggers.

Schulz

@rogercooper I'd really prefer having defenseless v3 transports but maybe I could do it if it is the only way to enhance AI gameplay.

I don't have much knowledge with triggers, probably I will be able to figure out if it is worth to create it ratherthan separate XML.