Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Tigers on the Hunt is a World War 2 hard-core tactical wargame for PC.

It creates a truly and immersive depth tactical simulation. Tigers on the Hunt boasts a ferocious and adaptive AI which will dynamically respond to a player’s maneuvers.

Moderators: Paullus, Peter Fisla

Post Reply
User avatar
Hailstone
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:05 am
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by Hailstone »

Typically, I play at the NORMAL setting because the HARD setting just got on my nerves seeing OoC affecting
my troops. But then I thought I'd give it another go and I found the HARD setting actually easier than the NORMAL
setting with the opposing units going OoC allowing my units to have their way with them. It doesn't seem to have
the same impact when my units go OoC for the obvious reason of human vs AI. We can improvise better than the AI so
I think the HARD takes advantage of the AI. Maybe it's just me.
User avatar
UP844
Posts: 1666
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 9:10 pm
Location: Genoa, Republic of Genoa (occupied by Italy)

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by UP844 »

Give the AI a chance (it badly needs it): take a further step and come to the wonderful world of the Very Hard setting, where you are affected by OOC and the AI isn't.
Chasing Germans in the moonlight is no mean sport

Siegfried Sassoon

Long Range Fire (A7.22)........1/2 FP
User avatar
Peter Fisla
Posts: 2501
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Canada

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by Peter Fisla »

For experienced players, I actually recommend playing on VERY HARD difficulty. The player follows the command and control rules but the AI does not. The AI was designed with command and control rules in mind (meaning, playing on HARD or VERY HARD difficulty). Normal difficulty is really for scenario designers to test their scenarios.
User avatar
Hailstone
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:05 am
Location: Phoenix, AZ

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by Hailstone »

Peter and UP844, Men I don't know if I have the guts to play VERY HARD because I hate losing!
Corto2London
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:05 pm

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by Corto2London »

I guess it's important to lose a game from time to time in order to establish some balance.
In that way, you appreciate much more each victory.
If you win each and every game, you even don't have any more the feeling of an opposition.
Very Hard would be my advice :-)
But of course you have to be prepared to some frustration when your squad get OOC on last turn,
at one step from VP :-)
User avatar
UP844
Posts: 1666
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 9:10 pm
Location: Genoa, Republic of Genoa (occupied by Italy)

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by UP844 »

The screenshot below shows why the AI needs every bit of help it can get.

The screenshot was taken at the very start of the German Defensive Fire segment.

In the previous Fire Segment, the British stack in 20,22 could have fired on four possible targets (highlighted in yellow). Even the dumbest player in the world would have fired on the adjacent stack containing the A** leader and 3 SS squads.
The British AI did not fire at all, nor did it move in the ensuing Movement Segment (this proves the AI is also able to take some wise decisions, since it would have been subject to some impressive negative fire modifiers [:D])

Just after this screenshot was taken, the German killer stack fired and broke all the units in 20,22.

I think is strong evidence that AI behaviour issues need to be dealt with far before we worry about the lack of Filipino troops, Tetrarch airborne light tanks and sub-arctic terrain types.

Image
Attachments
No_fire.jpg
No_fire.jpg (1.19 MiB) Viewed 1 time
Chasing Germans in the moonlight is no mean sport

Siegfried Sassoon

Long Range Fire (A7.22)........1/2 FP
User avatar
Peter Fisla
Posts: 2501
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Canada

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by Peter Fisla »

UP844,

Keep in mind that you are in GERMAN Defensive fire segment, which means no British units will fire in this segment. Not sure what happened in the British Fire Segment.

In the case above, the Support Weapon 51mm mortar is assigned to the Squad. I recommend assigning this type of support weapon to Half-Squad or Screw. Its possible the AI disregarded the Squad with the 51mm mortar (specific case to support weapons mortars) in which case you only really have 1 British Squad with a leader firing vs adjacent hex which is a building hex. Without looking at the saved game file its hard to tell.

User avatar
rico21
Posts: 3014
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2016 8:05 am

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by rico21 »

I talked to my sister, she says that the picture looks tricked [:(]
User avatar
UP844
Posts: 1666
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 9:10 pm
Location: Genoa, Republic of Genoa (occupied by Italy)

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by UP844 »

ORIGINAL: Peter Fisla

UP844,

Keep in mind that you are in GERMAN Defensive fire segment, which means no British units will fire in this segment. Not sure what happened in the British Fire Segment.

I see my previous statement might be misunderstood, so I will rephrase it:

In the British Fire Segment, the A*** leader and the two Airborne squads in 20,22 did not fire at all.

Firing the 51mm mortar does not prevent firing the squad inherent firepower, nor does firing the inherent firepower prevent firing the mortar, so why should the mortar prevent the squad from firing? When I played the British side, SS squads with Panzerfausts were more then happy to fire with their inherent FP when the PF was out of range or ineffective.

Anyway, why didn't the other squad fire? With a *** leader directing its fire and providing an overall negative fire modifier, it still has a decent chance to hurt the adjacent stack [&:][&:][&:]. I think an adjacent A** leader with 3 SS squads should be #1 on anybody's target list.

I will provide a saved game the next time this happens.
Chasing Germans in the moonlight is no mean sport

Siegfried Sassoon

Long Range Fire (A7.22)........1/2 FP
User avatar
rico21
Posts: 3014
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2016 8:05 am

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by rico21 »

[:)]
User avatar
rico21
Posts: 3014
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2016 8:05 am

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by rico21 »

FIRE PHASE,
A want to go B and do not fire
MOVEMENT FIRE,
A computing path and threat C and D, too dangerous, no move

What's happen in ADVANCED FIRE?

P.s: it was my sister's opinion

Image
Attachments
up1.jpg
up1.jpg (69.91 KiB) Viewed 1 time
User avatar
UP844
Posts: 1666
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 9:10 pm
Location: Genoa, Republic of Genoa (occupied by Italy)

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by UP844 »

Rico, your sister is a genius! [&o](*)

Of course, only Peter knows how the AI "thinks", but this is a plausible explanation of what happened. If (and this is a big if) your (sister's) opinion is correct, however, I feel the AI "situational awareness" requires some tuning, as it loses too many opportunities to fire.

By way of example, in this case the AI should re-evaluate the feasibility of a subsequent move ciclically during the fire segment: if the unit has not yet fired and has no significant chances of performing its move, it should fire.

Of course, all of the above hypotheses might be a meaningless rant...

P.S. In the Advancing Fire Segment nothing happened, as the German killer group broke all the British units, which were subsequently eliminated for failure to rout (see my screenshot above: wherever they rout, they would be adjacent to a German unit).

(*) I would exchange her for a 60mm mortar in Devil's Hill anyway [:)]
Chasing Germans in the moonlight is no mean sport

Siegfried Sassoon

Long Range Fire (A7.22)........1/2 FP
User avatar
Peter Fisla
Posts: 2501
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Canada

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by Peter Fisla »

I'm aware that AI is not perfect (and its never going to be), it's also very complex because of the nature of the game and the turn sequence of play.

However, If you find some obvious issues with the AI, it would be great if you guys can provide a saved game file (not always available I know) so that I can take a look and fix the issue. I want of course the AI to be fun to play and challenging, I will continue to improve the game for the future.
User avatar
Hailstone
Posts: 666
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 1:05 am
Location: Phoenix, AZ

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by Hailstone »

What the AI is really good at is INTERDICTION FIRE. I've given up trying to interdict the AI's routing units because I keep getting popups that say I can't interdict units in that hex but the AI seems to interdict at will. The AI's DEFENSIVE FIRE while my units are moving is another area where the AI does a decent job attacking my units. I'm assuming the AI is taking full advantage FFMO and FFNAM until it exhaust all available opportunities but when the AI enters the DEFENSIVE FIRE phase there are no more AI units left to defensive fire. Of course, knowing how the AI responds means I can take advantage
because I can easily "bait" the AI to commit on a diversion then I could practically just charge the unit. Not withstanding UP844's comments, the AI has it's strengths too.

Peter, the one thing that I'm actually more concerned about is the AI on offence. I can easily stall an AI advance by placing expendable units in front and then watch the AI doing it's best to eliminate the threat in front of it with all available units. The AI will not move forward or advance to take an objective even if it was adjacent to it if there is a unit to shoot.

I commend you on what you have achieved already and appreciate your continuing support of TotH!
User avatar
rico21
Posts: 3014
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2016 8:05 am

RE: Is the HARD setting actually hard?

Post by rico21 »

I want of course the AI to be fun to play and challenging, I will continue to improve the game for the future.[&o][&o][&o]


To Great Peter

Now
Fire phase:
A want to go B, no fire

Possible update
Fire phase:
A + [(immediate environment of A (threat == 1) == -50% move)]
want to go B + [(immediate environment of B (threat == 1) == -50% move)]
== -100% move, no move, open fire

P.S: it is not worth to thank me, it is my alien friends who found this formula in the nest!

Cheers!

Image
Attachments
up1.jpg
up1.jpg (91.22 KiB) Viewed 1 time
Post Reply

Return to “Tigers on the Hunt”