Iron War - Official Thread

[Black_Elk]

All sounds great. I had a thought on how to maybe make fuel consumption a little easier to manage. Its a bit gamey, but then again so are a lot of things haha.

Perhaps only combat movements use fuel?

What you'd lose in overall realism, you'd make up for in avoiding that problem where aircraft or ships get stuck with big red targets painted on their backs. Still allows for situations where the forward march could get stalled without enough gas, but at least players would have a way to handle their planning goofs with less catastrophic consequences. My guess is that this would cut the overall fuel consumption in game by half (probably more). Perhaps combined with an initial fuel cost to purchase as well, like the current scheme, which would help to rationalize or explain away the non-com stuff not consuming fuel.

A related alternative idea might be to have an opperational radius of some sort, within which non com moves are allowed free of charge. Like allowing players to move out from or return to a factory territory or coastal sea zone without consuming fuel. Again you could rationalize it as accessing some kind of strategic emergency reserve or the like, built into the initial purchase, but the practical gameplay purpose would be to give the human player a pass when they fuck up, or as a way to keep the AI competative on their home turf.

Just trying to think of some way to make the whole fuel=movement thing slightly more forgiving than what I experienced before, short of flooding the world with oil drums, which would kind of undermine it as an interesting gameplay resource.

[Black_Elk]

This isn't really related to the fuel issue, but if any further revisions of the current game are a possibility, I still think the major power that needs the most attention is Britain.

Right now the British feel kind of one dimensional compared to their Allies or rivals on the Axis side. I understand how breaking up the British Empire helps when all these factions are under AI control (since they can amass a lot more total production/TUV that way without seeming too overpowered for a single power throwing their weight around the globe). I also like the idea of a game that highlights the dissolution of the British Empire as a major feature of WWII. That said, under human control, it kind of feels as if there's not a whole lot for the British themselves to do. Compared with British-India or British-Colonies, which have some room to grow (if they can gobble up the Middle East, or take hits on Italy or Japan), the British in Europe are sort of frozen at their starting level.

Basically the way I saw it at first Britain had to push on Morocco ASAP to have any real chance of significant production expansion. Iceland seemed nice to have, sure, but Morocco was the closest factory viable territory with an overland target of opportunity nearby. Target Libya seemed somehow more attainable to me than Finland (since there is no factory viable location in Scandinavia other than the Finnish capital itself), but even going the Morocco/Libya route it's still damn tough putting enough TUV in Africa to actually uproot the Italians there. The Canadian factories feel largely irrelevant. I suppose Halifax might see a ship or two built if the Luftwaffe shuts down the coast off England/Morocco, but if it comes to that then the British game is pretty much shot already anyway. So its pretty much Morocco or bust haha. Anyhow, in the game below you can kind of see the predicament... Even if you bounce around the Med a bit, there's really not a whole lot of real estate up for grabs that the British can exploit. I think the first thing I'd do to try and make it a little more interesting is change the 3 Norwegian territories from Pro-Allies to regular Neutral. Having Norway as pro-Allies really works to Britain's disadvantage, since the Brits can't get at that steel unless Germany or Finland takes it first. This makes the Northern route pretty awkward, and easy enough for the Axis to shut down by simply not going there to begin with.

I think if Norway itself was Neutral and a +5 gold territory (factory viable) this whole northern region of the map would see more action from both sides.

A couple other alterations that I think might help...

Benelux to +5: to make a D-Day push more viable (either from Britain or the USA), since it would give them a toehold territory on the continent capable of supporting a factory.

Sicily to +5: sort of like the above, would encourage a sand and sea play pattern in the Med that is a bit more like what cracked off historically. In this case Sicily could serve as a stepping stone or toehold for the Allies to support a med fleet, since it would become factory viable but isn't threatened overland.

Greece to +5: This would also give the Brits a way into Europe from the south. Might open things up for Germany, Balkans or Italy as well with a factory build option, so seems like the advantage could go to either side there.

I suppose the basic theme behind this post is that I think the British would be more fun to play if there were more +5 factory viable territories that they could acquire around the European periphery. A few more +5 spots than currently exist here, because, given the choice between handing one of those +5s to Britain or the USA, the USA will always win out. The Americans have further to travel and more cash to throw around once they arrive, so it just seems ill advised to give any of these prime build spots to Britain. But if there were a few more possible factory locations around, maybe players would be more inclined to let the Brits get in on some of the action. Then you'd have like three interesting expansion routes for the Brits.

North to Norway: to mess with Finland (end around option to Poland, the classic Eastern Front attack pattern from A&A).
Center to Benelux: to mess with West Germany directly (liberate France and open the second front, the D-Day).
South to Libya, Sicily or Greece: to mess with Italy and Balkans (the Churchill special lol).

Anyhow, just some thoughts after playing a few solos as the British lol. In previous iterations the Royal Navy would often get slammed right out the gate, so I think the last German naval tweak was an improvement, but I still think the Brits need something to make them more exciting. There just aren't that many spots nearby to take over (since most revert to French control). It would be nice to help the feeling of expansion a bit, when you see larger swaths of the map change color to your own faction. In the current set up, the only real spot for this with the British is that pocket around Libya, so that's where I was gunning till it finally panned out around 1945.

0_1517737476806_Britain Round 12.tsvg

Here is another British solo game, this time went with a Northern attack plan. I think its shows what is probably the best chance the Brits have to prevail along that route, namely trying to dead drop West Germany and snake those 50 PUs with a surprise amphibious invasion. If you nab Denmark and the straits then some exploits that open up. A bit of a cheapshot on the machine since it has trouble controlling canal zones. The target Finland plan ended up being more effective than the target Libya one, since the Germans let their guard down. In this game I left Morocco for the Americans, but they were slow on the uptake, preferring to take Spain first for some reason instead of pressing North Africa. Brits dropped Finland in 1944.

0_1517749585827_Brits northern round 9.tsvg

ps. also, sometimes it still feels like 1945 (and the nuclear age) is arriving a little soon. At least in the single player vs AI type experience, the calendar advances pretty quickly. Like usually it takes until the 1950s before I can achieve a satisfactory conclusion (at least in an Allied campaign, Axis can break out a bit faster). I wonder how a 3 round year might feel for the pacing? Like in addition to "Early" and "Late" you could maybe add "Mid" or "Middle" into the mix?

Early 1940, Mid 1940, Late 1940...
Early 1945, Mid 1945, Late 1945 etc.

That would have the game reaching its natural conclusion about round 18, instead of round 12. Little more time to get stuff done before you feel like you're getting timed out, but still not quite as long as a 4 season split (which I admit seems kind of excessive) haha.

[Frostion]

@redrum
Please tell me that you save all the game engine and AI fuel handling ideas and eagerness to improve this aspect of the game, so you can one day bring the ideas to life

@Black_Elk
I hear what you are saying, and I can see that the British have limitations when it comes to strategies and expansion. I will not change Norway from Pro-Allied Neutral to true Neutral. I would like to keep a bit historical correctness (even though game play is important), and not have Britain attack Norway to get their resources. But I will try to motivate Germany a bit more in regards to attacking Norway. If Germany does this, then at least Britain can choose the liberation of Norway as a way to go.

I have made a version 0.2.2 XML. I have tested it as human Britain vs AI Germany. With the changes, it seems that if Germany captures Denmark in the first round and both German fleets are intact, Germany can join the Baltic and North Sea Fleets in the second round and take Norway. The Hard AI sometime does this, so I guess a human player would also consider it. I don’t think the Fast AI does this, maybe its too complicated a plan. I normally play with the Fast AI as the Hard AI is slowing the game down tremendously.

Of course the British can try to counter the above plan by moving their fleet and build a Battleship in the North Sea Zone (between Germany, Britain and Norway) in the first round. And even the French can try to help out by moving their two ships into the same sea zone and also build in it. But this might lead to the total destruction of the Allied fleets if the German naval forces are intact … so it’s risky / suicidal.

It’s a pretty big job to make years 3 rounds instead of 2, so that is not happening in the near future!

@all
Here is the new version. Britains navy is also nerfed a bit. You guys tell me what you think if you play it.

Iron War v0.2.2 BETA:
• Trondheim-Narvik is now a 1 PU territory, not 2.
• Norway is now a 5 PU territory, not 3.
• The Iron Ore in Norway is moved to Tronheim-Narvik and is now British from start.
• Removed 1 British Patrol-Boat from Celtic Sea.
• Removed 1 British Oil-Barrel from Egypt.
• Added 1 German Fighter to West Germany.
• Replaced 1 French Battleship with 1 French Destroyer in Bay of Biscay.
• Other minor changes.
(Right click download, rename and play with this file: 0_1517780449397_iron_war.xml )

[redrum]

@frostion Good point. I created a feature thread to official track and discuss fuel improvement ideas: https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/558/fuel-enhancements. Added some of the commentary from here but feel free to add additional thoughts.

[Black_Elk]

Sounds cool, I will try when I get back to the house.

Just to mention though, having Britain attack neutral Norway is in line with the history. Or at least, its still well inside the realm of historical possibility... Some actual plans from the wiki of the tricks that the Brits had up their sleeves with regard to Norway...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wilfred

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_R_4

"The Allies devised a plan to use the Soviet Union's 30 November 1939 attack on Finland as a cover for seizing both the Swedish ore fields in the north, and the Norwegian harbours through which it was shipped to Germany.

The plan was to get Norwegian and Swedish permission to send an expeditionary force to Finland across Sápmi, ostensibly to help the Finns. Once in place they were to proceed to take control of Swedish harbours and mines, occupying cities such as Gävle and Luleå and shutting down German access to Swedish ore, presenting Norway and Sweden with a fait accompli.
Because of the danger of Allied or German occupation and of the war being waged on their territory, both the Swedes and the Norwegians refused the transit requests.

Meanwhile, the Germans having realized the Allied threat, were making plans for a possible pre-emptive invasion of Norway in order to protect their strategic supply lines. The Altmark Incident of 16 February 1940 convinced Hitler that the Allies would not respect Norwegian neutrality, and he ordered the plans for an invasion hastened."

and from the Weserübung wiki...

"Starting in the spring of 1939, the British Admiralty began to view Scandinavia as a potential theatre of war in a future conflict with Germany. The British government was reluctant to engage in another land conflict on the continent that they believed would be a repetition of the First World War. So they began considering a blockade strategy in an attempt to weaken Germany indirectly. German industry was heavily dependent on the import of iron ore from the northern Swedish mining district, and much of this ore was shipped through the northern Norwegian port of Narvik during the winter months. Control of the Norwegian coast would also serve to tighten a blockade against Germany.
In October 1939, the chief of the German Kriegsmarine—Grand Admiral Erich Raeder—discussed with Adolf Hitler the danger posed by the risk of having potential British bases in Norway and the possibility of Germany seizing these bases before the United Kingdom could."

...

Framed that way it seems like the invasion could have come from either side, so seems reasonable enough to let the players model it if desired. I see it as similar to allowing either side to attack Turkey. Or allowing for other stuff not strictly by the history book, but which might have happened, Japan attacking Russia would be the prime example haha. But basically for a 1940 start date it seems like Norway would be fun as an option for both teams.

I agree that if we can persuade the Germans to routinely attack this direction early on then its probably less of an issue, since that activates the theater for the Allies. Having some of that Norwegian steel assigned to the Brits would be a motivation, and the +5 spot definitely sweetens the deal. I'm not sure if it will be enough for the AI though, which will determine the single player experience.

I'll be excited to check out the latest tweaks.

Also, I hear what you're saying about things getting slow. I might end up switching back to FastAI, since going HardAI I usually have to save and restart every couple rounds or things tend to bog down. Anyhow, will report back with a gamesave in a couple hours.

Best,
Elk

ps. OK downloaded the latest update with the changes and finally got it working (took me a minute to realize that the xml was listed in two spots haha.) About to launch a new solo with the Brits. I will return in a few hours after I see how things cracked off with a gamesave.

[Black_Elk]

Alright here's a quick Brit solo opener against the hard AI...

On my first 2 attempts the Germans immediately destroyed the Royal navy at anchor. Even blowing the whole wad on a British carrier didn't seem to deter them, so had to scrap that idea and come up with a better plan. In the third game I just sent a patrol boat to block in the North Sea Zone, sacrificing itself for the greater good. That seemed to do the trick, allowing for a transport purchase initially and then a carrier build the following round.

The dead drop on West Germany came rather sooner than expected here, since I went for the jugular as soon as the opportunity arose in round 3.

Not sure if Norway will see much love this time around, since it looks like the remaining German transports are too far out of range at this point.I wonder if the territory was completely empty of units if Germany would take a crack at it right out the gate?

Will launch a few more games and see what happens.

0_1517806840797_Norway tweaks Britain round 4.tsvg

[Frostion]

@Black_Elk
Pretty convincing about the Allied plan to take Norway. I might try out a new setup.

Yes, the German navy is pretty dangerous at start. This forces the British to keep a distance. But British reinforcements are sure to come from Canada, and Germany does not seem to strengthen their navy at any point in the game, at least not the AI. But the primary reason I like the Germans to have a strong Navy is that it is their only chance to have some navy action in the game, and their navy is sure to fall (sink) at some point as the Allied pressure is just too high.

PS: I think the AI has a habit of leaving VERY important and high value territories under-defended. I dont think it thinks "I cant let the enemy destroy my factory and let them harvest my 50 PUs, not even for a single round!" I think a human might think that

[Black_Elk]

Yeah I tend to agree, its more important for the overall gameplay enjoyment that Germany has a chance to get something going on the water, even if it nerfs Britain a bit. Otherwise its just hurling headlong into Russia every time and that would hurt the dynamism and long term shelf life of the map. I also think that as the first player in the turn order and the major big dog nation, the game kinda has to favor Germany (and the Axis team more generally) even if this stretches the imagination somewhat historically, just to maintain the gameplay. Without some creative license taken, WWII by the book would be rather boring. I think the gameplay is best with Axis headed towards complete world domination if left unchecked, even if that was probably more of an Allied propaganda narrative than historical reality, it makes for better drama and a better endgame.

Also agree on the West Germany thing. That'd be the last territory a human lets go of for sure haha.

Will put in some more time tomorrow and see how things go vs the AI.

...

OK just put in a few rounds for another British solo. This time I decided to try something a little different and prop up the French. We stacked Normandy as heavy as we could and seem to have just forced the Germans to withdraw from Paris. The situation up North was much the same as the last game, but the Germans are trying some crazy naval maneuvering in the Med. They took Crete and Cyprus, all dug in on the islands now, just sank the American fleet after it sailed past Gibraltar. Kinda cool. The French AI has been busy trying to take over Spain, while the British are taking little jabs at Germany/Italy trying to take some heat off Russia. So far seems to be working, will see how it concludes tomorrow...

0_1517821118351_Elk vs HardAI Axis Britain 6.tsvg

Here is the situation a couple rounds later. We crashed the party in Italy and then traded West Germany a few times, so it's pretty much cinched up in Europe, although Japan is getting massive...

0_1517903701789_Elk vs HardAI Axis Britain 12.tsvg

Back to the fuel thing, under the current system its really hard for me to determine how much oil I actually control and how much I am consuming at any given time. The economy tab isn't much help, even if I am constantly shuffling back and forth, because it only lists how much fuel is on hand, not the overall total. I guess its like only knowing how many PUs I have in the bank but not knowing how much Production I possess. Basically you have to count up the drums and then count up the ships and mobile units to figure out how to run a surplus. Otherwise I guess most people would do what I do, and just plan to always only have 1 fuel available at purchase, until a bunch of your stuff gets blown up or you start snaking the really oil rich territories from your enemies haha.

[Black_Elk]

Russia solo vs the hard AI. In this one Allies achieved 20 VC in just the third round. As USSR I threw everything at Persia, Iraq and Finland. I decided to continue playing after the Victory TKO, and a couple rounds later Germany is rolling up the entire eastern front haha.

Sadly still no action out of Norway, though Iceland, Morocco and Afghanistan got up in the mix. I think if Norway was neutral maybe the AI would put more into it. But as it stands here, Ruskies will likely be trapped and destroyed up north.

I noticed in most games that Japan is still pretty monster in the East, and Russia tends to get gobbled up. Maybe some more fighter support or a couple light tanks would be nice to help put up a wall?

Usually I see the Japanese breaking through right about now in the 5th or 6th round, after which point the Soviets just start hemorrhaging cash. I also wonder if the Russians couldn't support a bomber in Siberia or something, so they have a unit to snipe with in all these border clashes with Japan?

Irkutsk is a pretty long way from the Leningrad/Arch/Moscow pocket. I think anything that far east and the player/AI is more likely to use it to hold the Japanese at bay when they start pushing all those mobile units up through the backfield.Anyhow that was how I was feeling, like a few more air or tank units might help balance it out on that side of the board. This game below is about as effective as been able to manage against Japan without putting much into it, (just throwing all the starting units forward right out the gate) but once those dudes are spent it gets pretty ugly. And of course G looks poised to work the center, despite having no help from those minors anymore lol.

0_1518470377023_Elk vs HardAI Axis Russia 5.tsvg

[redrum]

@black_elk 20 VC might be too easy for the Allies. Though glancing at the game, it looks to actually be a somewhat interesting game into round 5. Are you planning to continue playing it?

[Black_Elk]

I went another round till they stomped Finland, but then the hardAI started to crawl, so I just gave up the ghost and launched a new game vs the Fast AI. Yeah the VC spread might be a little tight for the Allies early on, but I think a human could probably prevent the 20 VC win without breaking a sweat. I still evaluate the set up more in terms of the single player vs AI experience though, since I think that would be a popular way to play a map on this scale. As for Japan, its kind of the same deal, a human would probably be more aggressive vs Japan with a triple-team, or octouple-team or whatever, but when you're flying solo leaving it up to the AI, Japan brings the pain. Another fighter or a bomber for the far east might help stem the tide a bit. In the backfield vs Japan its usually a lot of smaller battles, rather than a large stack fest, so even a couple mobile attack points in the air might make a big difference.

Anyway, here's where I am in the new game at the moment vs the fast AI. This time I tried my hand at a Russian Baltic fleet and forward positioning as a way to trip up the Germans. So far so good along the front with G, they are surrounded by the red army. But Japan is starting to chip away things on the other side of the globe, and Italy is still hanging on in Europe.

0_1518484374337_Elk vs FastAI Axis Russia 9.tsvg

[Frostion]

@Black_Elk
Very good and constructive feedback, as always I really appreciate it. You have again pointed out some issues that have also crossed my mind, vaguely. But it’s first when other people point them out that they become clear.

• Yes, as you and @redrum point out, the 20 VC win is problematic and favours the Allied, maybe especially if the Allies focus on a very specific VC strategy. I have experienced several AI vs AI Allied fast-wins where the Allied AI, most likely coincidentally, wins fast by getting 20 VC . The map already starts out with a very uneven VC score: Axis 11 / Allies 19, and even though the Allies normally lose a couple of territories early on, it seems that the Allies can just focus their efforts on like Finland, Iraq and Iran and get the upper hand relatively fast.

I reckon that we could try to fix this issue by tipping the stating VC balance by 1 for starters, forcing the Allies to capture at least one more territory to win.

I have now tried to fix this by moving the Irkutsk VC to Oslo/Norway. This makes Norway a bit more important. It also sets the Allied start back a bit. And finally it makes “Plan R 4” a possible UK strategy and goal. Of course Norway has now become True-Neutral along with their Iron. I guess that all this also gives a human Germany more incentive to invade Norway.

• The Soviet far east does have a tendency to fall to Japan relatively fast. The Soviet AI does not seem to focus on building in that that area and protect it. But if the soviet forces become too strong from the beginning, then the Japanese territories in that area are in danger of falling to a Soviet invasion.

I have tried to give the soviets a bit more resistance to the Japanese, while still not making the Japanese overall weaker, there are now a bit more USSR infantry in the area and the Japanese infantry is withdrawn further away from the border of USSR. To not make the Japanese overall weaker (because they now have to build more units at the border) Japan also get a bit more Infantry on the map, but they are spread out on several territories, away from the Soviet far east (like Truk, Shanghai and Peking).

The Far East changes really alter the conditions in the east, but I difficult to see if it does what is needed. It seems that the AI can’t really handle protecting the USSR far east coastline, and that AI Japan sometimes goes all in and invades the USSR coastline, taking many territories simultaneously.

• Another thing, that has not changed but that is open for change/balancing is the territory of Japan PU income of 40 PUs. It could go up to 50 if needed. To me it sometimes seems that Japan is overall under a lot of pleasure from like ALL corners of the world, and that Japan is maybe slowly “worn down” as the game progresses. What do you think about that? Does Japan normally have problems in the long run? Could they need another 10 PUs (cost of 1 infantry) per turn from turn 2?

Here is a new XML test version 0.2.21:
0_1518553887906_iron_war.xml
0_1518553937673_vc.txt
(Right click, download, rename and override old files)

[Black_Elk]

So far I like it a lot. The front between the USSR and Japan feels a lot more stable. The Russians have just enough to hold the initial line around Vladivostok or Manchuria for at least a few rounds instead of just immediately folding back to the Irkutsk pocket. Basically you have a better shot at fighting along that whole Far East Pacific corridor, so long as you don't risk too much on the coastline.

I also really like how this Norway thing is panning out. Definitely more interesting for the region with the 20th VC here, since a lot of powers have a shot at it. Nice call! I think it puts a new spin on that region for sure.

Started my first solo as Russia just to tease out the new opening options. Tried a similar play against Persia and Finland, but this time the Axis held off the early VC win. Pretty fun so far. Here we are in the 5th round, for comparison with that earlier game...

0_1518596497170_2.21 Elk vs FastAI Axis Russia 5.tsvg

I'd like to see how the Russian Ai does with the new stuff, so probably will try a Japanese solo next...

[Hepps]

@frostion This is a very innovative map. Even though I am not particularly keen on playing the AI, I am very happy to see this has begun a new phase of re-development.

Keep up the fantastic work.

[Frostion]

Thanks @Hepps I am totally aware of the fact that not that many people play vs AI that much, but at least I and a few others do, so I try to keep my maps very AI compatible. And lucky for us @redrum is very interested and diligent in regards to improving the AI.

[Hepps]

@frostion Yah. It's great that we have different people designing to suit different tastes in playing. It has really helped to develop Triple A as a well rounded game platform over the years.

[redrum]

@frostion If only @Hepps stopped designing such interesting maps that require new engine features, then I could spend more time improving the AI

[Black_Elk]

Yeah I think its kinda cool to have a map that works well for an AI match, since it services a gameplay niche that isn't always represented at this scale. Some of the smaller maps like v3 work alright, but there you really have to boost up the machine for it to be competitive and its rarely going to be as satisfying as a head to head game with another human player. I think Iron War has a few things going for it, beyond just the usual A&A fair, that keep it enjoyable for me in the stomp down "paint the map my color" type department haha. I like the way the production is handled.

I managed about 8 rounds as Russia last night before I had to go to sleep. US AI was starting to step up pretty major as I recall, taking Iceland, Norway and Morocco. Here is how it was winding down when I hit the sheets...
0_1518641257162_2.2 Elk vs FastAI Axis Russia 8.tsvg

Went another 5 rounds on a new game this morning, this time as Japan vs the Fast AI (definitely speedier going fast for the AI rather than hard.) I think the Russian balance has finally hit the sweet spot with those latest additions. They've got enough juice in the far east now to keep Japan from just steamrolling across the backfield, but not so much that Japan can't hold them in check with some concerted effort. Feels like its striking a pretty nice balance, at least from what I've seen so far. Also just noticed the British drop a factory in Norway, so seems like that is working out well too. Germany is still pretty deep into Russia, but its not the typical smash and grab with no mercy, since the Soviets are holding onto more income in the Far East. Anyhow, just wanted to post an update...

0_1518641179982_2.21 Elk vs FastAI Allies Japan 5.tsvg

ps. Took it 12 rounds to late 1945. While I was busy stomping Australia and trying to push 200 with Japan, the Allies sneaked in the 20 VC win over on the European side. Nice job from the Anglo-Americans! AI Germany still might have a little fight left. I imagine we could drag this one out for a while but it's getting late hehe
Fun stuff! Allies were definitely more formidable, keeping the pressure on.

0_1518659012392_2.21 Elk vs FastAI Allies Japan 12.tsvg

[prastle]

@black_elk I became a fan of the ai with @Frostion use for the ai in tribes. Every game was different. Not always the same even when human vs human. Since the ai wasn't always seeming to do the same thing twice. Just my two cents. Thanks for the great work @redrum

[Black_Elk]

Yeah I like the way it handles, especially when the AI gets a boost to be competitive. In a solo it's not as critical since the AI beats up on itself fairly well. I tried a couple 2.2 games where I picked one of the minor powers and let the AI loose on itself, just to see if it could hold its own. The balance in Asia felt pretty solid. Here's an example where I just took control of Brazil for 12 rounds. There's not much to do as Brazil, and it's not really a playable faction, so for all intents it was a placeholder to observe and AI vs AI game haha. Anyhow this is how it looked in 1945 with the AI beating up the AI.

0_1519683983400_2.2 Elk vs FastAI Axis Brazil 12.tsvg

Then I played a few full games against the fast AI just to see how things panned out. In the first I took control of all the Axis nations and gave the Fast AI Allies a 120% boost. Took that one almost to 1950 before I got sleepy.

0_1519684121860_2.2 Elk Axis vs FastAI Allies Germany 18.tsvg

Afterwards I did the same thing but playing as Allies vs fast AI Axis with the 120% boost... Here it is at the dawn of the Nuclear era, with most of the world handled.

0_1519684209788_2.2 Elk Allies vs FastAI Axis China 11.tsvg

In general I'd say the game where I played as Axis was more engaging than the game where I played as Allies. I think it's mainly because the Axis get to really paint the map, and expand with a sense of momentum, whereas the Allies spend most of the game trying to liberate territory until they can establish a foothold somewhere. Also on the Axis side the minor powers (Balkans/Finland, Iraq/Iran, and Thailand) are definitely under pressure just to stay alive, whereas the minor Allies (France/British-Colonies, French-Colonies/ANZAC/KNIL, and China/Brazil) are a bit more secure, at least when you're taking control of the whole team. I found that the best use of the minor Allies was to just spam aircraft, especially bombers if you can get them up past the 30 ipc threshold on income, after which point you can pretty well murder the Axis production. Still it was pretty entertaining. I think this might have been the first time I took control of all the minor Allies, since usually it feels like a lot of spinning plates and I just give them over to the AI. In this game Japan got hammered after leaving their transports exposed to an air raid, so they were kind of nerfed out the gate. Made it a lot easier for Russia to put the hurt on Germany. I had fun but got a little tired as 1945 set it, so had to call it a night.

FastAI was smooth compared to HardAI, for the lag factor, but I still find myself reloading after a round or two or when things hang, or to scrub a turn and see how the AI responds to different stuff. Sometimes seems faster to relaunch than to wait for the fastAI to figure itself out if its struggling haha, but they usually hum along pretty quickly compared to the hardAI grind.