Has AI been implemented?

World in Flames is the computer version of Australian Design Group classic board game. World In Flames is a highly detailed game covering the both Europe and Pacific Theaters of Operations during World War II. If you want grand strategy this game is for you.

Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets

LeeChard
Posts: 1116
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:24 pm
Location: Michigan

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by LeeChard »

I bought the game knowing there was no AI. I effectively invested in the project to help move it along.
I've played solitaire a couple of times but I don't find it very satisfying.
User avatar
gw15
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 4:29 pm

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by gw15 »

There is PBEM, works just like solitaire except you send files back and forth.
Not many game stopping bugs any longer. I have played 2 full games solitaire until 1945. However, I usually don't have some of the weird conquer situations I see recently that are causing bugs.
Netplay...99% there. When a new update comes out it will be 99.9%.
I feel your frustration though. 10 years, right.
Raw 8 has some neat changes but not enough to change the MWIF raw 7. I'm an old guy so I like raw 7 much better than raw 8 simply because I learned raw 7.

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

One thing Steven said from the beginning, and now it clearer than ever, is that he didn't intend to follow the rule changes of WIF because that would stall advance in the rest of the fields.

Now it's more clear than ever, with so many game-stopping bugs, with no operative NetPlay, no PBEM , few scenarios, not all optionals that were promised (yet), far from AI, ... The last thing Steve should do is review and edit the routines that he finally got to work.

Better to have a WIF 7.0 working (some day) than a WIF 8.107 even worse than what we have now. And WIF 7.0 (MWIF) would still be the best computer strategy game ever (to date).
User avatar
Sabre21
Posts: 7877
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2001 8:00 am
Location: on a mountain in Idaho

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by Sabre21 »

So far my experiences with Netplay have been pretty bad. I haven't been able to get past turn 5 of the Global war game yet due to a myriad of bugs. I've had the game since release and the guy I game with (Bloodybill), both of us have pretty much given up trying to do Netplay. I'm not into the solitaire aspect of the game but Bloodybill does like it.


I've been playing WiF from day one and still have the original first version along with 5 and 7. I recently received the Collector's Edition Deluxe a few weeks ago and 3 of us are about to embark on a Global War 39 campaign starting next week.

There are tons of changes to Raw 8, not just in the ruleset, but on the counters and with the map. Personally I think this is the best version yet. I really like what they have done with offensive points and how the oil rules have changed. A lot of changes to minor country order's of battle now with the inclusion of reserve militia units in places like Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, Iran, Iraq and many others. It's going to be interesting seeing how this new version plays out.
Image
User avatar
juntoalmar
Posts: 662
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 2:08 pm
Location: Valencia
Contact:

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by juntoalmar »

ORIGINAL: gw15

Not many game stopping bugs any longer. [...]
Netplay...99% there. When a new update comes out it will be 99.9%.
got to work.

Then we should be ok in 2-4 months maximum to start moving forward to new goals, don't we? In your experience, do you feel new bugs will pop-up? Or things have been pretty stable recently?
(my humble blog about wargames, in spanish) http://cabezadepuente.blogspot.com.es/
User avatar
michaelbaldur
Posts: 4800
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 6:28 pm
Location: denmark

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by michaelbaldur »

ORIGINAL: juntoalmar

ORIGINAL: gw15

Not many game stopping bugs any longer. [...]
Netplay...99% there. When a new update comes out it will be 99.9%.
got to work.

Then we should be ok in 2-4 months maximum to start moving forward to new goals, don't we? In your experience, do you feel new bugs will pop-up? Or things have been pretty stable recently?

when you fix bugs, you make bugs.

solitaire is mostly fuctional, but sometimes something funky happens, so I have not finished the game in years.

as I see it, the most bugs are in supply and Vichy. but to be fair both of those areas are really complex.

when we started to test Vichy, many years ago. I predicted, that the last bug fixed, would be a vichy bug.



the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

if you have questions or issues with the game, just contact me on Michaelbaldur1@gmail.com
User avatar
Centuur
Posts: 9013
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 12:03 pm
Location: Hoorn (NED).

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by Centuur »

ORIGINAL: juntoalmar

ORIGINAL: gw15

Not many game stopping bugs any longer. [...]
Netplay...99% there. When a new update comes out it will be 99.9%.
got to work.

Then we should be ok in 2-4 months maximum to start moving forward to new goals, don't we? In your experience, do you feel new bugs will pop-up? Or things have been pretty stable recently?

I'm afraid new ones will pop-up. We're still finding new bugs (yesterday we've had problems restoring autosaves for Netplay f.e.), but the huge problems we did encounter in air-to-air combat and naval combat seems to have been cleared. There's still a nasty one around, concerning aborting planes due to Anti Aircraft fire.
Peter
User avatar
Joseignacio
Posts: 2798
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 11:25 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by Joseignacio »

ORIGINAL: Sabre21

So far my experiences with Netplay have been pretty bad. I haven't been able to get past turn 5 of the Global war game yet due to a myriad of bugs. I've had the game since release and the guy I game with (Bloodybill), both of us have pretty much given up trying to do Netplay. I'm not into the solitaire aspect of the game but Bloodybill does like it.


I've been playing WiF from day one and still have the original first version along with 5 and 7. I recently received the Collector's Edition Deluxe a few weeks ago and 3 of us are about to embark on a Global War 39 campaign starting next week.

There are tons of changes to Raw 8, not just in the ruleset, but on the counters and with the map. Personally I think this is the best version yet. I really like what they have done with offensive points and how the oil rules have changed. A lot of changes to minor country order's of battle now with the inclusion of reserve militia units in places like Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, Iran, Iraq and many others. It's going to be interesting seeing how this new version plays out.

I would agree that it's the best version and changes have been extremely good.

What doesn't mean there are no setbacks as the really stupid sub warfare values, which makes it difficult anytime and impossible after 1941. A real nonsense.
User avatar
gw15
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 4:29 pm

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by gw15 »

We are using raw8 in a Vassal game but I'm not playing the Axis.
Paul - are subs way under powered after 41?
User avatar
paulderynck
Posts: 8356
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:27 pm
Location: Canada

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by paulderynck »

I don't think so. One notable change for the better is subs do not lose a factor each in surface combat. If the ASW values seem high then perhaps the table of their values (see 11.5.10 in the rules) versus the kits used is being interpreted incorrectly. After all, no matter which kits you use, BBs are worth nothing. Also the first version of the rules - since erratisized - had CAs worth 4 each in '43 and thereafter when playing with CLs. This was a typo - they should be 1 each.

Also the criticism may be true if the CL option is used. If you're naval nut and want to play with ALLL! the ships then you may want to use CLs but personally I think the CL option should not be used as it is way too allied-friendly.
Paul
User avatar
Sabre21
Posts: 7877
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2001 8:00 am
Location: on a mountain in Idaho

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by Sabre21 »

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I don't think so. One notable change for the better is subs do not lose a factor each in surface combat. If the ASW values seem high then perhaps the table of their values (see 11.5.10 in the rules) versus the kits used is being interpreted incorrectly. After all, no matter which kits you use, BBs are worth nothing. Also the first version of the rules - since erratisized - had CAs worth 4 each in '43 and thereafter when playing with CLs. This was a typo - they should be 1 each.

Also the criticism may be true if the CL option is used. If you're naval nut and want to play with ALLL! the ships then you may want to use CLs but personally I think the CL option should not be used as it is way too allied-friendly.

I'm using all the options for naval in the game I'm about to start and CoiF option 7 caps light cruiser ASW at 2 each from 41 on. CV's and Ca's remain at 1 each for the war. You also can add in naval factors on planes aboard any carriers and each 5 CP's get 1 ASW factor now.


ASW ships are now integrated into a few convoy chits that now consist of 3 cp's and either a scs or cve group. There's not too many of those though and they don't start coming available until 41.


You can also interdict most subs now with sub-hunter aircraft forcing subs to either stop or fight thru a sea zone. These don't come available until 42 and are few and far between.


From the sub perspective, a single naval move now allows a major power at war to move all his subs from as many ports that he chooses and with the new way of having a land/sea action using offensive points (no more chits) opens up all new kinds of strategies.



Image
User avatar
Joseignacio
Posts: 2798
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 11:25 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by Joseignacio »

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

I don't think so. One notable change for the better is subs do not lose a factor each in surface combat. If the ASW values seem high then perhaps the table of their values (see 11.5.10 in the rules) versus the kits used is being interpreted incorrectly. After all, no matter which kits you use, BBs are worth nothing. Also the first version of the rules - since erratisized - had CAs worth 4 each in '43 and thereafter when playing with CLs. This was a typo - they should be 1 each.

Also the criticism may be true if the CL option is used. If you're naval nut and want to play with ALLL! the ships then you may want to use CLs but personally I think the CL option should not be used as it is way too allied-friendly.

It's difficult for me to explain why, because the 8.xxx rules are changing all the times and it difficult to be updated.

What I say comes from a recent experience, I just finished a game with 8.107 (?) where I was GE. After '41, the values go insane: 2 each SCS not BB (like in older rulesets), 1 each 5 convoys (way too much for game balance), 1 per CV, 1 per air ot sea factor with the right climate.

When you consider all this in a game, you'll experience how sub warfare is kaputt.

First you have to find the enemy (as always) and the enemy not find you.

Let's say you are in box 2 or 3 depending on the sea you are attacking and then you can have a 0 or -1 because of wheather, plus the number of convoys divided by 5. Let's say you have a 30 - 40% probabilities to find the enemy. The higher boxes escorts may be in box 3 or 4 modified by cliimate. Let's call it a modified 3.

you'd have a 60 or 70% not to find, the convoys but in this case there would be a 30% that the escorts finded you. You also have a 30-40% to find the convoys and then there will be a 30-40% that the enemy finds you.

This means the probabiliy that you¡:

- don't find anything but the upper boxes escorts find you, it is (let's convert the 30-40% into a 35%) : 65%*30% = 19.5%. This is called complete desaster, since it's pretty usual that there is at least one battleship in the upper levels, ans the combat is Surface , no Sub. Plus they have usually a lower surprise roll.

- don't find anything and they don't find you: 65% * 70%= 45.5% You are not f*cked but you spend a/some naval move/s for nothing.

- find them but you are found by upper boxes escorts: 35%*30% = 10.5% Disaster as well, still found by upper escorts including some BB usually with Surprise on their side. And it's a Surface combat, not Subs.

-find the convoys and you are not found. Only favourable scenario: 35% * 70% = 24.5%.

This means 30% (19.55+10.5%) disaster, no conv sunk, several subs damaged or sunk. 45% you activate for nothing. 25% some posibilities at a high cost, see what follows:

Even in this last case (probability under 1:4) if there is any plane (NAV, CV) or several of them (and the weather is not storm or blizzard) you still have to spend some (variable) surprise points to change from Naval air combat. If you don't, it will be air to sea which means you cannot attack convoys. Disastrous, you get hits and do nothing.

If you are lucky enogh to have enough surprise to be able to use surprise to attack convoys in spite of the planes,...

... you still need to use it to avoid complete destruction of your subs: the combat value of the escorts is cumulative and it's not strange to find like 2 or 3 points because of 6+ convoys or 10+ convoys, plus like 6-10 from 4-5 escorts plus possibly one for a CV (maybe light CV), plus planes (CV +NAV).

It means you WILL most probably have a roll for a wolf pack sunk (at least)in exchange for one convoy pack or maybe 1 X + 1D.


Real, Real Nonsense.

Note: BB worth 0 only if using an optional, although in this case I guess you don't get CLs or get fewer.

Note 2: The statistics worsen if there is a plane or CV in the upper level escort and they can fly (climate) by a 10%, affecting the rest of the calculations.
User avatar
paulderynck
Posts: 8356
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:27 pm
Location: Canada

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by paulderynck »

Much of what you say is true, but has always been true since at least RAW7. Nothing new here. However, the latest CE rules have been stable for months now and BBs are not worth any ASW anytime.

Also the stats you give are essentially for always attacking when moving second. There are times to attack and times not to attack.

Paul
User avatar
Grotius
Posts: 5842
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 5:34 pm
Location: The Imperial Palace.

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by Grotius »

Jose, would you mind if I quote or link your post over in the BoardGameGeek forums? There are a couple guys there who insist that subs are stronger in CE than in RAW7, and I'm curious to see how they'd respond to your post. I'm still learning CE -- I'm in S/O '39 of my first solo Global War -- so I don't know enough to reply myself.
Image
User avatar
Joseignacio
Posts: 2798
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 11:25 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by Joseignacio »

You can do it freely. I will comment Paul's post later, but basically it's true that most of what I said was there earlier, but it was an unbalanced sub warfare earlier and the small enworsements just made it a little bit worse, which is simply unbearable.
User avatar
juntoalmar
Posts: 662
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 2:08 pm
Location: Valencia
Contact:

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by juntoalmar »

Taking into account that the thread's name is "Has AI been implemented?" perhaps this discussion could be moved to a new thread. Not for me (I have followed the thread from the beginning) but I was thinking about a newbie entering here for the first time and that he could be pretty confused with talks about AI, RAW7, CE... [:)]
(my humble blog about wargames, in spanish) http://cabezadepuente.blogspot.com.es/
User avatar
Joseignacio
Posts: 2798
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 11:25 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

RE: Has AI been implemented?

Post by Joseignacio »

Sure, it's not usual in the forum, as you well know. I will create a new thread to debate subs features (in case someone wants to go on with it).

Done!

tm.asp?m=4522523&mpage=1&key=&#4522526
Post Reply

Return to “World in Flames”