Matrix Games Forums

Characters of World War 1Sign of for the Pike and Shot Beta!More Games are Coming to Steam! Deal of the Week: Combat Command Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great WarDeal of the Week Panzer CorpsNew Strategy Titles Join the FamilyTablet Version of Qvadriga gets new patch
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: AI for MWiF-Italy

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: AI for MWiF-Italy Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/4/2006 2:28:56 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 18150
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ptey
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
As for the strategic choices of players at WIF tournaments, I believe the analogy to chess openings is appropriate. Over the years different chess openings have been popular. At different times one will be considered to provide the best opportunity to win. Eventually, someone comes up with counter moves that reduce the opening to a more equitable outcome, and the opening's popularity wans.

Clearly, chess, with its rigid rules set for the past 150 - 200 years, is not 'forcing' the players to play a certain opening. Rather the players are the variable and they are choosing an opening that they think gives them the best chance of winning. Over time, I suspect that WIF will evolve different responses to German/Axis strategic plans that will cause the choice of which strategic plan to employ to mutate too.


This is probably true. However this doesnt change the fact that some strategies are 'gamey'(that is, very strong strategies in specific situations, which are possible by the rules, but highly ahistorical and (i think) not intended by the designers) and most likely will be considered so by most players. There will ofcourse be degrees of 'gameyness'.

I will personally prefer to play against an ai that doesnt employ gamey tactics/strategies in every situation possible. Some people will ofcourse have different preferences, however i dont think that im alone with this opinion. Thus providing an option to have the ai not use any strategies or tactics flagged as gamey, should be acceptable for all. This will ofcourse require more work, but i dont think it will be that much.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Getting back to a Baltic state as a new home country for the Italians, ...

Yes, it seems strange. But in 1939, wouldn't having the Free French government set up in Gabon have seemed strange too? And all those other countries who had elements of their fighting forces operate out of England (e.g., Norway, Belgium, Netherlands, Poland)? The capacity of armed forces to continue fighting for their country after the war is clearly lost is really quite astonishing. So, if the Italians had been given the opportunity by Hitler to occupy Estonia and later set up a home-away-from-home there, the likelihood of remaining Italian units being willing to continue fighting doesn't strike me as completely far-fetched.


Perhaps not completely far-fetched, but imo (based on my knowledge of history) extremely unlikely. I have never seen italy liberate the baltic states, but if someone did it in a game i participated in, with the intend of using them as back-up home countrys, i would consider it gamey. But i do ofcourse realize it is a legat move, and a house rule would be needed to prevent people from doing it.

This is in no way meant as a threat, but if you intend to teach the ai every gamey trick there is (and you can find quite a few by looking through the wiflist and from speaking with very experienced players i would think), i probably wouldnt have much fun playing against the ai and would buy the game only for pbem and netplay games.


Personally, I am very adverse to "tricky little bits", especially if they look like something a rules lawyer figured out. I believe strongly in a direct approach and consider it essential for the AIO. The trouble with using something weird is that it can often have unexpected repercussions. Simple, straightforward, solid play is best. Remain focused on the main objective and don't be sidetracked by odd opportunities might result in a confusing position to analyze. This is the logic of KISS (keep it simple, stupid) for AIO design.

Nevertheless, I want to know about the tricky bits, if for no other reason than for the AIO to be able to defend against/react to them. And I expect to give most of them a low probability of being chosen by the AIO if the requisite conditions arise.

As for using restrictions on strategic plans as a way of reducing the AIO's ability to play a strong game - I can only hope to have such a problem as the AIO playing too well that it needs to be 'fixed'.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to ptey)
Post #: 61
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/5/2006 5:28:15 AM   
ptey

 

Posts: 41
Joined: 9/25/2006
From: Copenhagen, Denmark
Status: offline
Thank you for the clarification, this sounds much like the kinda ai i would have fun playing against.

To go back on topic, I saw this http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/wifdiscussion/message/87958 post recently on the wiflist. I dont know if its alittle to vague for what you are looking for, but i think it has some nice points.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 62
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/5/2006 8:34:15 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 18150
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ptey

Thank you for the clarification, this sounds much like the kinda ai i would have fun playing against.

To go back on topic, I saw this http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/wifdiscussion/message/87958 post recently on the wiflist. I dont know if its alittle to vague for what you are looking for, but i think it has some nice points.

Thanks for the Italian strategy reference. I use all the sources I can get my grubby paws on for things related to WIF planning.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to ptey)
Post #: 63
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/5/2006 8:39:28 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7895
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ptey

Thank you for the clarification, this sounds much like the kinda ai i would have fun playing against.

To go back on topic, I saw this http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/wifdiscussion/message/87958 post recently on the wiflist. I dont know if its alittle to vague for what you are looking for, but i think it has some nice points.

I must say that this production schedule looks like it is used in a "Barbarossa with the kitchen sink" Axis strategy.

kaikunze says that :
quote:

Italy is an integral part of the European Axis. It must not be played independently from Germany,
there should be but one strategy and one operational command. In practice, that means that the German player, with advice from the Italian player, should make strategic decisions, decide what and how much Italy builds, decide where Italian units are deployed and decide what action type Italy takes each impulse.

While I agree in parts, I strongly refuse that Italy is played this way by Germany.

Italy also has his goals, and can accomplish them if Germany let it do it. Italy must not be Germany's puppet and must think 1) to its defense and 2) to achieve its goals and 3) to help Germany. While it's true that the Euroaxis must be a team that work in close cooperation (as the Wallies must too), it is also true that Italy must think for itself. Italy can win the game if played with its own pride and leadership.

I've often played against players that made Italy a puppet (they are the Con players that are ready to anything within the rules to win), and who ranked things differently : 1) to help Germany 2) to its defense and 3) to achieve its goals. These players often used Italian units to do the dirty job, and a couple a German units to captures the juicy objectives cities, this is all wrong for me. Italy must be given his own pride and leadership.

(in reply to ptey)
Post #: 64
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/5/2006 10:37:01 AM   
CBoehm

 

Posts: 113
Joined: 10/31/2005
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

I've often played against players that made Italy a puppet (they are the Con players that are ready to anything within the rules to win), and who ranked things differently : 1) to help Germany 2) to its defense and 3) to achieve its goals. These players often used Italian units to do the dirty job, and a couple a German units to captures the juicy objectives cities, this is all wrong for me. Italy must be given his own pride and leadership.



Well since I never played with individual victory conditions ....

I ALWAYS play Italy - Ge as ONE ...they need to both support and help each other who cares who captures what unless it has some specific gameplay purposes ei. who captures Athen in relation to who can allign Yoguslavia ...or who installs Vichy ...or who alligns Iraq etc etc.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 65
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/5/2006 12:12:00 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7895
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

I ALWAYS play Italy - Ge as ONE ...they need to both support and help each other who cares who captures what unless it has some specific gameplay purposes ei. who captures Athen in relation to who can allign Yoguslavia ...or who installs Vichy ...or who alligns Iraq etc etc.

You're right that they need both to support and help each other, but I do not agree that "who cares about who captures what", because the game is won or lost on this basis, and as a man of Italian Origins I'm fed up of German players taking the lot in front of the Italian player.

In game's I'm in, either as the German or the Italian, I always care to let the Italian fulfill his own objectives. If I'm the German, I ask him beforehand, and we adjust our mutual help so that both our goals can be fulfilled. I may ask him sacrifices, but he deserves that the German does some to him too.

You'll notice that in RAW, in all player / countries distributions that are cited, when there are enough players to play the game, Germany and Italy are never given to a single player. Italy and Japan will be given to the same player, but not Italy / Germany. This is a too strong combo.

And I could say exactly all the same for the CW / USA association.

< Message edited by Froonp -- 12/5/2006 12:20:44 PM >

(in reply to CBoehm)
Post #: 66
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/5/2006 12:56:28 PM   
CBoehm

 

Posts: 113
Joined: 10/31/2005
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline
yeah and France is given to the USSR ...I know that Harry intended these setups to create conflicts of interest ...but I have just always played the game as a team-game ...since we/I think this is more friendly&fun-&-goodtime-lets-go-for-a-beer-afterwards ....

Well not entirely true ...we did once play one or two games with individual victory conditions, but after the slightly inexperienced USSR player threw the game away on some stupid "MUHHAHA-Im the USSR who doesnt care or listen to what the wallies say because Im gonna win alone!!!" we decided against it ....to me the game just takes too much time and effort to have some misguided jerk throw the game away, which in my experience is much MUCH more likely to happen with individual victory conditions.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 67
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/5/2006 2:39:09 PM   
trees

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline
I thought Kai's Italian directives were excellent and perhaps a little less Barbarossa-centric than a previous poster, though that poster didn't flesh out a build skeleton as much and would probably agree with this one. I do like to build the Aquila CV sometimes though to have fun with in the mid-game as part of a Mid-East or Gibraltar strategy but it is an expensive investment.

I've always enjoyed playing Italy starting in Third Reich and played them in my first game of WiF so long ago. I decided their goal would be South Africa and built TRS to get there without walking, which made the CW pay extra attention to me early in the game, oops.

A common Axis mistake on a two-person team is for each to work out German and Japanese impulses and moves first and then figure out what to do with Italy as an afterthought. I think Italy should strongly cooperate with Germany on an impluse by impluse basis. Once Barbarossa starts I might max out Italian production with German loans, but before then loans will probably depend on if the Russians are trying to delay a '41 Barbarossa. I'm a little more accustomed to playing 2-player WiF though, your mileage may vary.

(in reply to CBoehm)
Post #: 68
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/6/2006 4:47:23 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2098
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: online
Italy is very unwise to put its home country in the Baltics after the fall of Italy. They are usually quick to be abandoned by the Wehrmacht when it is on the retreat from the USSR in '43-'44, and there is no way the Italians will be able to stand up to the Red Army. If Italy wants to ensure its survival, even if incompletely conquered, till the end of the game, it should probably avoid such a choice.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to trees)
Post #: 69
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/7/2006 5:03:05 AM   
Incy

 

Posts: 296
Joined: 10/25/2003
Status: offline
One thing that haven't been mentioned is that it can be a good ide to have italy install Vichy.
Vichy france shares activity limits with the installing power, and if it ever becomes active (very common if north africa is still french), the Vichy fleet will be a lot more effective if it has italian action limits.

To have italy install Vichy, italy must have a land unit in Paris upon Vichyfication. This is not always easy, but in many cases Paris falls early in a turn and italy can move a unit into Paris after the germans take the city. For this reason (and to help with garrission/holding flanks) I usually rail an italian (fastmoving) landunit to behind the french front as soon as possible.

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 70
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/7/2006 7:57:01 AM   
Froonp


Posts: 7895
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Incy

One thing that haven't been mentioned is that it can be a good ide to have italy install Vichy.
Vichy france shares activity limits with the installing power, and if it ever becomes active (very common if north africa is still french), the Vichy fleet will be a lot more effective if it has italian action limits.

To have italy install Vichy, italy must have a land unit in Paris upon Vichyfication. This is not always easy, but in many cases Paris falls early in a turn and italy can move a unit into Paris after the germans take the city. For this reason (and to help with garrission/holding flanks) I usually rail an italian (fastmoving) landunit to behind the french front as soon as possible.

I've never seen Vich France active in 15 games. Not even hostile.
Why a western ally would make it active or hostile ? Nothing warrants that. If North Africa is Vichy, just don't go there. The cons outbalance the pro imo.
I always prefered to land in France, force the Axis to collapse, and then Vichy territory becomes Free French.

(in reply to Incy)
Post #: 71
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/7/2006 11:59:11 AM   
hakon

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

Italy is very unwise to put its home country in the Baltics after the fall of Italy. They are usually quick to be abandoned by the Wehrmacht when it is on the retreat from the USSR in '43-'44, and there is no way the Italians will be able to stand up to the Red Army. If Italy wants to ensure its survival, even if incompletely conquered, till the end of the game, it should probably avoid such a choice.


Of course, Yugoslavia is always the preferred choice for second home country. The strategy I outlined, assumed a "kitchen sink" barbarossa strategy, however. In my experience (and opionion), such a strategy is not complete without a No Bessarabia gambit, which requires a dow on Yugoslavia.

On the other hand, if an all out Barbarossa is successful, the Baltics can be very secure for Italy for a long time.




For those that consider using a baltic country for resereve italian home land a bit gamey, I agree fully. It is firmly withing the rules, though, and quite important if using a strategy where Italy risks being knocked out early, with most of her air force abroad. If you see a conquest coming, you can even save some of your navy and land units. If the AIO is to have a chance at beating a player that plays in the same way, it needs all the advantages it can get. I, for one, find that my human opponent use these kinds of strategies all the time.

I already wrote a proposal on how to limit the AI to more historical paths in the "Historical AI" thread, so that players (and reviewers for magazines, etc, that often only plays the game once) that want more historical outcomes can force a more historical game.

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 72
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/7/2006 12:06:27 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7895
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

For those that consider using a baltic country for resereve italian home land a bit gamey, I agree fully. It is firmly withing the rules, though, and quite important if using a strategy where Italy risks being knocked out early, with most of her air force abroad. If you see a conquest coming, you can even save some of your navy and land units. If the AIO is to have a chance at beating a player that plays in the same way, it needs all the advantages it can get. I, for one, find that my human opponent use these kinds of strategies all the time.

I just would like to stress out one little detail that lies within this sentence : "you see a conquest coming, you can even save some of your navy and land units."

While this is true, this needs to be REALLY fine tuned, because, if it is not, traying to "save some of your navy and land units" can accelerate Italy's fall.

I'd add that a conquered Italy is never a good thing, even if only incomplete, because with half the activity limit, no production + little or no force pool, it is down to a Minor Country level.

(in reply to hakon)
Post #: 73
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/7/2006 12:24:00 PM   
hakon

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

While this is true, this needs to be REALLY fine tuned, because, if it is not, traying to "save some of your navy and land units" can accelerate Italy's fall.



I fully agree. Italy should attempt to keep the allies from achieving the "biggest garrison" requirement for as long as they can. In fact, in the original post, i did stress that you try to hold Italy for as long as possible, by a stubborn defense. But do keep in mind the context (all out barbarossa, including Bessarabia Gambit), here. If you cannot crush the USSR or lure the allies into invading France early, the allies will be in a position to conquer Italy in 1943 or 1944 at the latest.

Saving whatever remains of the navy is reasonably easy, since they can always just return to another port, outside of Italy. Saving land forces is usually restricted to what you can rail/transport out of italy in the last turn, and then ONLY if you know that there is no way to keep italy alive for more than 1-2 turns more.

Saving any unflipped aircraft stationed in italy can be achieved by using it to fly naval air (and then land in Yugoslavia/France), or by simple rebase, which can usually be achieved with a simple air impulse.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 74
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/7/2006 12:57:32 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7895
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
Just to add detail to what you said :

quote:

ORIGINAL: hakon
I fully agree. Italy should attempt to keep the allies from achieving the "biggest garrison" requirement for as long as they can. In fact, in the original post, i did stress that you try to hold Italy for as long as possible, by a stubborn defense. But do keep in mind the context (all out barbarossa, including Bessarabia Gambit), here. If you cannot crush the USSR or lure the allies into invading France early, the allies will be in a position to conquer Italy in 1943 or 1944 at the latest.

Beware that this can be much sooner. I've seen Italy fall in S/O 41, in a Barb 40 with no France strategy. I agree that this is extreme, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Italy fall in fall 42 under a "kitchen sink 41 barb". The CW can invade Italy from mid 41 if it built AMPH from the turn 1 (which I always do, except if a France 1st Strategy is seen).

quote:

Saving whatever remains of the navy is reasonably easy, since they can always just return to another port, outside of Italy. Saving land forces is usually restricted to what you can rail/transport out of italy in the last turn, and then ONLY if you know that there is no way to keep italy alive for more than 1-2 turns more.

Saving any unflipped aircraft stationed in italy can be achieved by using it to fly naval air (and then land in Yugoslavia/France), or by simple rebase, which can usually be achieved with a simple air impulse.

Usually this is impossible to save aircraft, as you already used them to try to save Italy, so they are flipped (because of their mission). The only one that are saved, are those that could rebase outside Italy during the turn, after their air mission. But even them are of limited numbers, because you would only begin to do this (rebase aircrafts outside Italy) when it is blattantly clear that the garrison ration will be broken whatever place the aircraft rebase to.

Usually you can only save a couple of land units, that are either capable of walking out of Italy, or railing out of Italy, and as you also do this late in the turn, when you are really sure that the garrison ration is lost.

(in reply to hakon)
Post #: 75
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/7/2006 1:28:26 PM   
hakon

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
Exactly the possibility of being conquered in 41 or 42 is why I stress the defence of Italy. Imo, Italy should always be able to survive until the US is in the game, unless they make a mistake.

42 is perhaps the most critical period. The US will often be active early enough to make an impact during the summer of 42, which means that significant resources are needed to defend. By using most available garr and mil (both german and italian) for defence, as well as keeping some mech divs, graziani, etc in various spots in italy, you should be able to defend most cities, while still being able to blitz any invasion force back to sea even in 42. (Often at the cost of risking partisans in Yugoslavia or France).

In this scenario, it is also vital to extract all land units (except territorials) from africa before italy joins the war, as Africa is likely to be out of supply anyway.

The only situation where I would consider preparing for evacuation of Italy, would be late 43 and onwards, and only if the allies station enough troops in the med to be able to guarantee a conquest of Italy. The decision to flee should ideally be taken at the beginning of a turn instead of at the end, to save as many aircraft as possible. (Saving 10 aircraft, Graziani and a few inf/mech/arm is worth it even if italy falls 1 turn earlier, imo.)

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 76
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/7/2006 3:24:30 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7895
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

The only situation where I would consider preparing for evacuation of Italy, would be late 43 and onwards, and only if the allies station enough troops in the med to be able to guarantee a conquest of Italy. The decision to flee should ideally be taken at the beginning of a turn instead of at the end, to save as many aircraft as possible. (Saving 10 aircraft, Graziani and a few inf/mech/arm is worth it even if italy falls 1 turn earlier, imo.)

My own experience was always to try to hang to Italy the longest possible. I never "evacuated" early as you describe. My opinion is that, gaining a turn may make you gaining a whole season, sometimes a year, because the turn you gain might be the latest "usable" turn for the Allies to conquer Italy in the year.

I have often seen Italy being conquered 1 year latter than it could have had because of reasons linked to lost impulses for the Allies. Impulses can be lost to organisation problems (either because of the Axis antishipping actions, or because of poor TRS rebasing, poor planning, etc...), or because of the Weather, or other fronts needs.

So, as Italy, I want to add whatever reasons for the Allies to lose time conquering me, because the fall of Italy is a real bottleneck in the progression of the Allies in Europe, hence in the game. The longer I hold, the longer they are paralyzed trying to make me fall.

(in reply to hakon)
Post #: 77
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/7/2006 7:01:42 PM   
hakon

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

My own experience was always to try to hang to Italy the longest possible. I never "evacuated" early as you describe. My opinion is that, gaining a turn may make you gaining a whole season, sometimes a year, because the turn you gain might be the latest "usable" turn for the Allies to conquer Italy in the year.

I have often seen Italy being conquered 1 year latter than it could have had because of reasons linked to lost impulses for the Allies. Impulses can be lost to organisation problems (either because of the Axis antishipping actions, or because of poor TRS rebasing, poor planning, etc...), or because of the Weather, or other fronts needs.

So, as Italy, I want to add whatever reasons for the Allies to lose time conquering me, because the fall of Italy is a real bottleneck in the progression of the Allies in Europe, hence in the game. The longer I hold, the longer they are paralyzed trying to make me fall.


Well, as previously mentioned, evacuating Italy in this scenario is a bit speculative on my part. So far, in all the three games I have tried an all out barbarossa with the western Axis, the allies have surrendered once it became clear that Russia would be conquered. I guess I will continue to repeat that strategy until somebody can show me how to stop it.

And I agree with you that Italy should not try to evacuate if there is any chance of holding as much as half a year extra. Typically, full evacuation is only an issue if the allies has already landed on a previous turn, but failed the conquest conditions by a small margin, but has lots of reserves in north Africa, Sardinia, etc, that they can easily send in the next turn. If conquest becomes a fact in mid-turn, a fraction of the forces may still be saved though, by sending them out.


(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 78
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/11/2006 3:42:33 AM   
Incy

 

Posts: 296
Joined: 10/25/2003
Status: offline
If North africa, and especially Tunisia is Vichy, I think it's qite common to make Vichy Active, Tunisia is just to good an aircraft carrier to pass up. There's also Syria, which in many cases can be the only thing blocking the southern LL-route to russia (India->Persian gulf->Iraq->Syria->Turkey->USSR, or alternatively India->red sea->Egypt->Syria->Turkey->USSR)

Also, Vichy will normally have 2 resources in africa, and sometimes an Iraqi oil. As Vichy, I always try to build (or move if I get them for free) CP to transport those resources. With german action limits, naval action limits for this is often not enough of a priority. With Italian limits, it's easy as cake. The resources (and oil) are sent to Vichy factories, and will make sure Vichy fills with BP/oil much sooner than otherwise.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Incy

One thing that haven't been mentioned is that it can be a good ide to have italy install Vichy.
Vichy france shares activity limits with the installing power, and if it ever becomes active (very common if north africa is still french), the Vichy fleet will be a lot more effective if it has italian action limits.

To have italy install Vichy, italy must have a land unit in Paris upon Vichyfication. This is not always easy, but in many cases Paris falls early in a turn and italy can move a unit into Paris after the germans take the city. For this reason (and to help with garrission/holding flanks) I usually rail an italian (fastmoving) landunit to behind the french front as soon as possible.

I've never seen Vich France active in 15 games. Not even hostile.
Why a western ally would make it active or hostile ? Nothing warrants that. If North Africa is Vichy, just don't go there. The cons outbalance the pro imo.
I always prefered to land in France, force the Axis to collapse, and then Vichy territory becomes Free French.


(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 79
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/11/2006 7:15:03 PM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline

Assuming the Commonwealth and the USA are at war with Italy.
 
These requirements should be fairly easy to meet to cause an Incomplete Conquest of Italy.

2. The Allies control Tripoli.
3. The Allies control any printed factory hex in Italy (apart from Rome).
4. The Allied garrison value (see 13.1) in Italy is greater than the Italian garrison value there (remember, Sicily is part of Italy).

As far as "Activity Limits" are concerned Incomplete Conquest will slightly reduce Italy's activities. Italy can still choose its own Air, Combined, Land, or Naval activities.
 
If Germany would be in supply and hold Rome at the end of the next year they could liberate Italy for a year.
 
 But...

If the USA has a DoW only against Italy (as in the examples in the RaW) and the USA and were to incompletely conquer Italy. The USA would throw all German units out of Italy. This would make all hexes in Italy (with the exception of hexes controlled by the Commonwealth) controlled by the USA.
 
If more than one major power from the same side controls the capital and printed factories in a home country, the major power with the greatest influence in that home country is the conqueror.

Use this priority to determine who has the greatest influence:
1. Whoever controls most factories in the home country (with the capital counting as an additional 3 factories for this calculation).
2. Whoever has the highest garrison value (see 13.1) in the home country.
3. Whoever occupied the home country’s last factory or capital city.

In this case all that is necessary would to be for the USA to be in control of the printed factory hex in Italy (apart from Rome).

(in reply to Incy)
Post #: 80
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/11/2006 8:54:05 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7895
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

If Germany would be in supply and hold Rome at the end of the next year they could liberate Italy for a year.

Why for a year ?
If the Wallies take Rome back (from the Germans who liberated Italy), now Italy is conquered a second time, and this time this is a complete conquest whatever minor country they still control.

So, as the German, it would be very unwise to liberate Italy if you are not able to keep it untill the end of the game.
Also, if you take back Rome, and that you do not liberate Italy, I seem to remember that now the Italians no longer cooperate with you.

So taking Rome back as the Germans who just lost it to the Wallies is not something I'm willing to do.

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 81
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/11/2006 10:51:46 PM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

(1) Why for a year?

(2) If the Wallies take Rome back (from the Germans who liberated Italy), now Italy is conquered a second time, and this time this is a complete conquest whatever minor country they still control.

So, as the German, it would be very unwise to liberate Italy if you are not able to keep it until the end of the game.

(3) Also, if you take back Rome, and that you do not liberate Italy; I seem to remember that now the Italians no longer cooperate with you.

So taking Rome back as the Germans who just lost it to the Wallies is not something I'm willing to do.


(1) Ok, My mistake. I thought you said (over a year ago in a previous thread) that conquest was a yearly thing. 13.7 Peace is the end of each turn.

(2) I thought earlier in the thread it was agreed Italy was to align Yugoslavia (Cbohem post #65) and Italy installing Vichy.

IMO it is very dangerous to let Italy install Vichy without aligning a minor country or to allow the USA to declare war on Italy separately.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13.7.1 Conquest

Complete conquest

(2) When a major power or minor country no longer controls its own or any aligned home country, it has been completely conquered. Thereafter, it is at peace with everyone it was at war with.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Liberation effects

13.7.5 Liberation

Return half of the liberated country’s units not currently in the game (by type, rounding fractions up) to its force pools (except France’s if Vichy was installed). Liberated minors’ units join the force pools of their liberating major power.

A liberated major power or minor country gets back control of all hexes it controlled at the start of the 1939 campaign game that are now controlled by the liberating major power. Other major powers on its side can give back such territory that they control.

If you liberate the original home country of a conquered major power or minor country, it again becomes the home country for its units, replacing any alternative home country.

(3) A liberated major power can co-operate (see 18.) with any major power that returns all eligible territory to it. If they could return territory but don’t, they can never co-operate with the liberated major power.

For the remainder of the game, the liberating major power controls the liberated major power for all purposes.

Liberated minor countries are aligned, and may co-operate, with the liberating major power.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



< Message edited by Mziln -- 12/11/2006 11:08:53 PM >

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 82
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/11/2006 11:19:56 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7895
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

(1) Ok, My mistake. I thought you said (over a year ago in a previous thread) that conquest was a yearly thing. 13.7 Peace is the end of each turn.

Well, I do not remember that;sorry to have mislead you.

quote:

(2) I thought earlier in the thread it was agreed Italy was to align Yugoslavia (Cbohem post #65) and Italy installing Vichy.

IMO it is very dangerous to let Italy install Vichy without aligning a minor country or to allow the USA to declare war on Italy separately.

I for one, would advise warmly that Italy aligns Yugoslavia (this is a win-win situation for the German / Italian, well, especially for the Italians, much less for the Germans in reality), on the other hand, I would not reccommend Italy making Vichy.

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 83
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/12/2006 4:30:53 AM   
trees

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline
If you've never seen an active Vichy.... why not have Italy install it? I've always wanted to try it but haven't gotten around to such an 'experimental' move, that will probably have to wait for a game of MWiF. I am having great fun with an active Vichy in a game right now (The CW went to war with them to get in to Morroco and try to re-develop land bases in the Med; Algeria and Tunisia already belong to Italy and naturally trench warfare has set in on the Algerian border). Vichy can't activate a sea zone, but they can certainly hang out and play naval defense on occasion. Russia shut down the 1941 Barbarossa leaving the Germans with little to do but persecute CW CP's, so they can afford Naval impulses. WiF is great fun with gamey situations like a Japanese convoy chain safely bringing home to Vichy the Senegal resource while the Vichy CP haul ore for Italy and keep the Med in supply. It's also fun that Vichy ships from their worldwide bases (in supply through Suez) generate Presence of Enemy for the Axis, it's kind of like a bunch of Soviet 'fishing trawlers' dogging the Allies everywhere. I have Vichy all set to have fun with the rule that they can't enter Axis hexes, but there doesn't seem to be any prohibition against invading Allied hexes, especially those taken from Vichy France.... Too bad the fun is about to end as the summer of 42 approaches and the Germans will be lucky to even get their SUB reinforcements out into the Atlantic. I wish I had had Italy install Vichy in this game.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 84
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/13/2006 1:56:45 AM   
Incy

 

Posts: 296
Joined: 10/25/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

If Germany would be in supply and hold Rome at the end of the next year they could liberate Italy for a year.

Why for a year ?
If the Wallies take Rome back (from the Germans who liberated Italy), now Italy is conquered a second time, and this time this is a complete conquest whatever minor country they still control.

So, as the German, it would be very unwise to liberate Italy if you are not able to keep it untill the end of the game.
Also, if you take back Rome, and that you do not liberate Italy, I seem to remember that now the Italians no longer cooperate with you.

So taking Rome back as the Germans who just lost it to the Wallies is not something I'm willing to do.


I don't really see the big downside from having Italy install Vichy.
-you have to send one italian corps to France prior to Vichification
-You can't send germans into Vichy groups that are attacked, only Italians (but foreign troop comittment is still in effect, so there's a limit to how many german HQs can be sent into say north africa anyways) But hey, now you can even base ships/TRS there, which may speed up the defence!!
- If metropolean Vichy france is invaded, only italians can help out (germans still cant enter).
-If VF is collapsed before Italy is completely conquered, old Vichy france hexes may become allied controlled, because they are italian controlled and not german controlled
-saved BP/oil will go to Italy (but can be relent to germany next turn)
+Vicy gets to share Italian action limits (and yes, if Vichy is active, Vichy ships can fight and activate! Vichy BP can often repair damaged ships "for free", if you're out of storage space for BP)

Vichy is "run by" and not "controlled by" Italy, so it doesn't prevent complete conquest of Italy, but it also doesn't get conquered if Italy gets conquered (even completely). (What happens if Italy is completely conquered before Vichy collapse is not defined in RAW..)
Naval units on spiral go to the power collapsing Vichy, which can still be germany.

Did I miss anything?

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 85
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/13/2006 4:51:29 AM   
trees

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline
probably only the possiblity of a bored WiF player trying to break Steve's carefully coded code by asking for Japan to install Vichy.

[I forgot that in rule 17 Vichy their navy is less restricted and perhaps should be weighed more heavily in Allied decision making.]

(in reply to Incy)
Post #: 86
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/13/2006 6:01:01 AM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline
It’s not what happens to Vichy. It’s what happens to Occupied France and then Vichy.

Occupied France would be a conquered major power home country controlled by Italy.
Vichy France would be a neutral major power run by Italy.


(in reply to Incy)
Post #: 87
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/15/2006 3:38:36 PM   
petracelli

 

Posts: 93
Joined: 10/28/2003
From: Herts UK
Status: offline
Have been reading through suggested strategy and building and would just like to add some thoughts.

Italy to be able to survive especially if the Allies are going to come after her first if the med is not closed needs Nav and Ftr's to survive. It is all vey well saying it should commit a large number of air untis to Russia but if the Allies have Gib then you can expect Sardina to be under threat very early indeed.

To able to avoid this situation then Italy needs' to build Nav and it needs them sooner rather than later closley follwed by Ftr's.

If the Germans have gone for a 41 Barb they should be requesting the long range FW 190's to protect the Med sea zones.

If Germany goes after Gib then all the Nav come sin very useful in clearing the Brits out of Cape St Vincent and then the Bay.

With Gib in Axis hands Italy can then turn it's little eyes on the middle east and looking to align Iraq, far more likely than Turkey.

As for DOWing at the start an early entry exposes your fleet but is conuteracted by allowing Germanty to send you much needed resources. Is very hard to programme as depends entirley on risk and reward, not forgetting USE entry chits. As always best to be aggressive in 1940 when the average is at it's lowest.

Once the Allies have Gib back then it's time to defend Sardina and Malta if you have it and to have pletny of Ftr' and Nav to contest the Italian coast.

regards

Phil

(in reply to Cheesehead)
Post #: 88
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/15/2006 6:57:43 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7895
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: petracelli

Have been reading through suggested strategy and building and would just like to add some thoughts.

Italy to be able to survive especially if the Allies are going to come after her first if the med is not closed needs Nav and Ftr's to survive. It is all vey well saying it should commit a large number of air untis to Russia but if the Allies have Gib then you can expect Sardina to be under threat very early indeed.

To able to avoid this situation then Italy needs' to build Nav and it needs them sooner rather than later closley follwed by Ftr's.

Completely true.

quote:


If the Germans have gone for a 41 Barb they should be requesting the long range FW 190's to protect the Med sea zones.

If Germany goes after Gib then all the Nav come sin very useful in clearing the Brits out of Cape St Vincent and then the Bay.

With Gib in Axis hands Italy can then turn it's little eyes on the middle east and looking to align Iraq, far more likely than Turkey.

Completely true too.
That's the point I'was defending in previous posts when I said that Italy can have its own objectives, and not only be the puppet of Germany.

quote:


As for DOWing at the start an early entry exposes your fleet but is conuteracted by allowing Germanty to send you much needed resources. Is very hard to programme as depends entirley on risk and reward, not forgetting USE entry chits. As always best to be aggressive in 1940 when the average is at it's lowest.

Once the Allies have Gib back then it's time to defend Sardina and Malta if you have it and to have pletny of Ftr' and Nav to contest the Italian coast.

regards

Phil


(in reply to petracelli)
Post #: 89
RE: AI for MWiF-Italy - 12/16/2006 2:34:06 AM   
hakon

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: petracelli

Italy to be able to survive especially if the Allies are going to come after her first if the med is not closed needs Nav and Ftr's to survive. It is all vey well saying it should commit a large number of air untis to Russia but if the Allies have Gib then you can expect Sardina to be under threat very early indeed.



True. The UK can often take Sardinia as early as 41 (or even 40) in this scenario. If you follow my strategy above, it is important to retrieve the 4 corps + art that you start with in africa. Combine that with a few german mil/garr, and you should be abe to garrison italy sufficiently to stay unconquered until the USA joins the war, at least, and even prevent british landings in the Italian home land. Make sure that every likely landing place is within range of either the mech or Graziani, so that any landing force can be blitzed back to sea at once.

quote:



To able to avoid this situation then Italy needs' to build Nav and it needs them sooner rather than later closley follwed by Ftr's.

If the Germans have gone for a 41 Barb they should be requesting the long range FW 190's to protect the Med sea zones.


I agree that having navs is the best way to keep italy alive. I disagree on the 190's though, and also on the timing. In my opinion, 1942 is the right time to attempt air superiority in the Med, or at least force the allies to stay in the 0 box. My favourite is to use any italian fighters that go into the 2 box (ie that have 4+ range), combined with short ranged navs, blue stukas, etc. You will still find on a 4 if you have a nav and the enemy uses a convoy point to keep sardinia in supply. Should you manage to cut supply to Sardinia, you may be in a position to retake the island. (I did this once, killing Alexander, a Mar, a Para and a couple of flipped aircraft in the process.).


quote:


If Germany goes after Gib then all the Nav come sin very useful in clearing the Brits out of Cape St Vincent and then the Bay.

With Gib in Axis hands Italy can then turn it's little eyes on the middle east and looking to align Iraq, far more likely than Turkey.


Turkey is really not that hard, if you crush the USSR :) After Turkey, you control the iraqi oil, anyway, at least until 44 or something. Going for Gib is a valid strategy, just not part of the all out Barbarossa strat.

quote:


As for DOWing at the start an early entry exposes your fleet but is conuteracted by allowing Germanty to send you much needed resources. Is very hard to programme as depends entirley on risk and reward, not forgetting USE entry chits. As always best to be aggressive in 1940 when the average is at it's lowest.



Dow'ing in early 40 suits me best. Italy does need the LL, but it is also nice to have time to extract the african forces before dowing. Since Italy doesnt really need her fleet in my strategy, I also want the allies to dow me, especially in 39/early 40 when their chits are high. I am willing to loose quite a chunk of the italian navy if I can delay US entry by a turn or two.

One final point that I would like to stress: IF Italy should go for an agressive med strat, I think the goal of it should always be to close the med by taking Gibraltar and suez. Spending any significant amount of production on a fleet without securing the home land, leads to a very weak italy indeed. The times that I have seen Italy fall in 1942, have typically been after Italy has spread out too thinly, allowing easy allied invasions.

Conversely, when NOT going after Gibraltar, I think Italy is best off just Turteling in, keeping all their ground forces at home, and just going for naval denial usinga a fleet-in-beeing strategy, combined with a massive naval air threat able to reach low boxes in the italian cost and western med, along with some naval air able to reach a somewhat higher box in the eastern med. The naval air does not need to be there until 1942, as mentioned above, as land forces should be more than enough in 1941. This creates a potential for a crushing number of axis aircraft on the eastern front in the summer of 1941, with enough italian fighters remaining there to secure air superiority throughout 1942. If the USSR collapses, or at the very least is preassured enough to be stopped from building fighters, air superiority in the med in 1942 and 1943 is a real possibility, even while barbarossa continues in strength.

(in reply to petracelli)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: AI for MWiF-Italy Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.137