|
Post by Noname117 on Jun 17, 2019 14:04:52 GMT -6
In the limited amount of playing of RTW2 I've done so far, I've seen a nice mix of unfair and fair engagements, some of which were balanced with or against me. A large factor in determining unfair engagements seems based around what ship types you have in a region, and who gets a support force and who doesn't. Typically I've noticed that the battle generator tries to generate the main forces of an engagement with roughly equal numbers of the same ships on each side, but if either side lacks ships of a specific class then they wind up at a disadvantage. So if you lack a ship class compared to your enemy and the battle heavily relies on that ship class, you're likely to be at a disadvantage even if you have a large number of ships in the region. Or it might be the case where you have the heavy units to fight a battle, but the battle generates with a fair amount of heavy units per side and a lack of medium and light units harms your force.
Or sometimes you just get unlucky and the enemy gets a support force while you don't.
|
|
|
Post by sloanjh on Jun 17, 2019 22:07:47 GMT -6
I am convinced the AI flat out 'cheats' in terms of escaping wars. I'm in a war with russia for a 'mere' few turns, I invade a colony of theirs, and they instantly get to escape the war with absolutely nothing to reward me with. We have said this before, and I will say it again: the AI does not cheat, it never has and never will. I have personally examined the code sections that Fredrik wrote that applies to this aspect (for other issues, not to look for 'cheating') and I can say that any claims that the AI cheats must derive from either observational bias or an unintended bug. Fredrik himself has confirmed this several times. As a developer/publisher I would never stand for a game where the AI 'cheats', I strongly dislike that idea with a passion and would not allow such a thing. Thanks for this definitive statement. I have never thought there was a thumb on the scales, but it's good to have the statement. One thing that others have pointed out and that I think I've noticed as well (both in RtW1 and RtW2) is that the types of ships you have present in a region can lead to strange matchups. For example, (I think) someone mentioned that when both CV and CVL are present in a region, the CVL never show up in a battle; once I got CV I noticed the same effect. Similarly, I've noticed that having a few DD in a region, especially if there are no CA or CL present, is a bad idea because that's how you end up with convoy attacks or cruiser actions with only 2 DD. I wonder if part of what might be going on is that if the OOB generation code were to favor (in the sense of giving a better OOB for a battle) "balanced" fleets in a region (because that is the force structure that Frederik envisioned when writing the code) and if the AI deployment strategies also favored sending balanced fleets to regions (for the same underlying reason) then it could be that players are seeing an apparent bias towards the AI because they're sending (what the system perceives as) unbalanced fleets. In RtW2 the effect could be even more pronounced if "Trade Protection" status plays a major role in OOB generation (which I think it does). If, for example, the player is only assigning cutters and DD to TP, while the AI is assigning cruisers and even capital ships I could easily see people not understanding why ships were or were not showing up to certain battles. To be clear, I don't think ANY of this would be intentional - it might just be a subtle side effect of the same person writing both algorithms.
|
|
|
Post by secondcomingofzeno on Jun 18, 2019 3:47:53 GMT -6
I am convinced the AI flat out 'cheats' in terms of escaping wars. I'm in a war with russia for a 'mere' few turns, I invade a colony of theirs, and they instantly get to escape the war with absolutely nothing to reward me with. We have said this before, and I will say it again: the AI does not cheat, it never has and never will. I have personally examined the code sections that Fredrik wrote that applies to this aspect (for other issues, not to look for 'cheating') and I can say that any claims that the AI cheats must derive from either observational bias or an unintended bug. Fredrik himself has confirmed this several times. As a developer/publisher I would never stand for a game where the AI 'cheats', I strongly dislike that idea with a passion and would not allow such a thing. Technically it cheats by intention. They can take more than 1 ship off you and almost always do, you can only (and rarely) take 1 ship off them.
|
|
|
Post by alsadius on Jun 18, 2019 5:39:21 GMT -6
We have said this before, and I will say it again: the AI does not cheat, it never has and never will. I have personally examined the code sections that Fredrik wrote that applies to this aspect (for other issues, not to look for 'cheating') and I can say that any claims that the AI cheats must derive from either observational bias or an unintended bug. Fredrik himself has confirmed this several times. As a developer/publisher I would never stand for a game where the AI 'cheats', I strongly dislike that idea with a passion and would not allow such a thing. Technically it cheats by intention. They can take more than 1 ship off you and almost always do, you can only (and rarely) take 1 ship off them. I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that you can only sink one ship in a battle? Because that's not my experience at all.
|
|
|
Post by yemo on Jun 18, 2019 6:15:45 GMT -6
Technically it cheats by intention. They can take more than 1 ship off you and almost always do, you can only (and rarely) take 1 ship off them. I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that you can only sink one ship in a battle? Because that's not my experience at all. I think it has to do with taking ships in peace deals. I was rarely allowed to take one.
|
|
|
Post by alsadius on Jun 18, 2019 8:07:38 GMT -6
Ah, I've yet to get a ship in a peace deal - only ever colonies and resources. I also haven't yet lost a war.
|
|
|
Post by ramjb on Jun 18, 2019 11:49:24 GMT -6
Technically it cheats by intention. They can take more than 1 ship off you and almost always do, you can only (and rarely) take 1 ship off them. I'm certain by this point that this is the only board where I've ever been where people who whine more than they talk are treated this kindly. You sir got a direct answer from one of the members of the development team adressing your posts and telling you the AI does not cheat... your comeback is that "ok, it doesn't cheat, yet is till cheats". So I don't know what's the point of this thread, really. Whining in the open?. Venting off?. Because watching things like this is clear that developer answers is not what people are looking for.
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Jun 18, 2019 13:16:57 GMT -6
Technically it cheats by intention. They can take more than 1 ship off you and almost always do, you can only (and rarely) take 1 ship off them. I'm certain by this point that this is the only board where I've ever been where people who whine more than they talk are treated this kindly. You sir got a direct answer from one of the members of the development team adressing your posts and telling you the AI does not cheat... your comeback is that "ok, it doesn't cheat, yet is till cheats". So I don't know what's the point of this thread, really. Whining in the open?. Venting off?. Because watching things like this is clear that developer answers is not what people are looking for. Being the wonderful board that treats him kindly, I will note that he is right in saying “we can only take one ai ship in peace deals”. I haven’t had experience with AI taking ships from me so I can’t comment on that. But I will also kindly point out that by now we have strayed from AI cheating in battle generation to what’s basically finding any areas in which ai and players are treated differently. In that case I always thought the fact that ai don’t fight wars with each other will be better for you to use instead If the game does not work for you, feel free to vent your frustration, but sometime it’s best for everyone to just drop what doesn’t work for you and move on. In any case, I think it’s the time to go check out the officer’s mess again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2019 13:32:55 GMT -6
I'm certain by this point that this is the only board where I've ever been where people who whine more than they talk are treated this kindly. You sir got a direct answer from one of the members of the development team adressing your posts and telling you the AI does not cheat... your comeback is that "ok, it doesn't cheat, yet is till cheats". So I don't know what's the point of this thread, really. Whining in the open?. Venting off?. Because watching things like this is clear that developer answers is not what people are looking for. Being the wonderful board that treats him kindly, I will note that he is right in saying “we can only take one ai ship in peace deals”. I haven’t had experience with AI taking ships from me so I can’t comment on that. But I will also kindly point out that by now we have strayed from AI cheating in battle generation to what’s basically finding any areas in which ai and players are treated differently. In that case I always thought the fact that ai don’t fight wars with each other will be better for you to use instead If the game does not work for you, feel free to vent your frustration, but sometime it’s best for everyone to just drop what doesn’t work for you and move on. In any case, I think it’s the time to go check out the officer’s mess again. I absolutely dont understand your point. When you pay for game without graphics as much as for a new A+ class strategy, you expect other things to be better than in other games, not worse. Even if I have unlimited money, I would still stuggle to just move on... The point moved from battle genereation to other things simply because it was already solved that the battle generation is heavily biased.
|
|
|
Post by Noname117 on Jun 20, 2019 13:46:57 GMT -6
Being the wonderful board that treats him kindly, I will note that he is right in saying “we can only take one ai ship in peace deals”. I haven’t had experience with AI taking ships from me so I can’t comment on that. But I will also kindly point out that by now we have strayed from AI cheating in battle generation to what’s basically finding any areas in which ai and players are treated differently. In that case I always thought the fact that ai don’t fight wars with each other will be better for you to use instead If the game does not work for you, feel free to vent your frustration, but sometime it’s best for everyone to just drop what doesn’t work for you and move on. In any case, I think it’s the time to go check out the officer’s mess again. I absolutely dont understand your point. When you pay for game without graphics as much as for a new A+ class strategy, you expect other things to be better than in other games, not worse. Even if I have unlimited money, I would still stuggle to just move on... The point moved from battle genereation to other things simply because it was already solved that the battle generation is heavily biased. Look, I have not seen the battle generation be consistently biased against me for even a full length war yet. Individual battles maybe, but not a full war. I've had fair fights, fights balanced against me, and fights balanced with me. And as I stated before, what is probably going on here depends on how you built and deployed your fleet, with maybe a sprinkling of luck. With the medium to large battles the game tries to generate, it tries to put a roughly even number of ships of each type on each side. If you lack a specific class of ship, then you get less of them than your enemy, while not gaining any more of the other classes of your ships in the region (which would explain the example given with the lone B going up against a larger force, because that larger force was larger due to other ship classes). Having support forces disabled means that you're never going to get one while the enemy might, further decreasing your chances of having favorable numbers. And yeah, there is a bit of luck as well. But from all my playing of RTW2 and RTW1 this is what I have seen, and the differences in battle generation between the two games do not seem that major.
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Jun 20, 2019 14:40:48 GMT -6
Being the wonderful board that treats him kindly, I will note that he is right in saying “we can only take one ai ship in peace deals”. I haven’t had experience with AI taking ships from me so I can’t comment on that. But I will also kindly point out that by now we have strayed from AI cheating in battle generation to what’s basically finding any areas in which ai and players are treated differently. In that case I always thought the fact that ai don’t fight wars with each other will be better for you to use instead If the game does not work for you, feel free to vent your frustration, but sometime it’s best for everyone to just drop what doesn’t work for you and move on. In any case, I think it’s the time to go check out the officer’s mess again. I absolutely dont understand your point. When you pay for game without graphics as much as for a new A+ class strategy, you expect other things to be better than in other games, not worse. Even if I have unlimited money, I would still stuggle to just move on... The point moved from battle genereation to other things simply because it was already solved that the battle generation is heavily biased. Even if I pay for an A+ game with A+ graphic I still expect the content to be good. I believe game ought to be evaluated as a whole and while graphics will always be a consideration, they shouldn't be something you discuss without accounting for the context of the game. As for "being better", I think until Ultimate Admiral comes out there isn't a game out there in the market right now that lets us draw any meaningful comparison as to which little area is "better". Even if we set aside graphics, I can make argument like "Heart of Iron 4 gives me much better control over fleet composition and force allocation in fighting battles". Does this mean RTW is necessarily "worse"? I don't think that to be the case, while room for improvement certainly exist, these two games are not trying to do the same thing, so the way rtw generates battle needs to be taken in the context of the whole game. Anyways I am off on a tangent so lets bring it back to the fundamental point. The team have explicitly stated that the AI does not cheat, nowhere it is established that battle generation is biased. Thus any "unfairness" you feel with regard to the battle generation is either subjective affirmation bias, or that there exist some bugs that the team is not aware of. In case of bugs, its certainly something they can look into, but insisting that the game AI is trying to "cheat" over and over again does not help this cause. Many people have posted experience contrary to your own, therefore please consider the possibility that possibility that you might be overstating the issue here. It is certainly possible that the degree of randomness inherent in battle generation does not work for you, but that is the way RTW is designed, player are not meant to have total agency nor are things expected to go your way at all times. It is fair to make some alternative proposal that others have mentioned, such as setting squadron flagship or more ship roles. But it is probably clear that RTW will never ensure balance of force at every single battle being fought. If you do not like this, it is totally fair, but I don't see it being changed and personally would not want to see it changed. I say its best to move on if you don't find it working out because I feel there are changes you are either just not true to the premise of the game, or to fix things that does not seems to be broken. If you had already spent money and it became clear that it isn't for you, trying to force it to work for you is a waste of time for everyone involved. Don't get me wrong, it is totally fair to bring your issue with the game to the devs and ask for changes, but there are no game that can be made to accommodate everyone's preference. In that case it might be worth to consider changing how you are approaching the issue. Sometime the issue can just go away if you change the way you think about it.
|
|
Warspite
Full Member
Sky of blue/And sea of green
Posts: 230
|
Post by Warspite on Jun 20, 2019 18:18:53 GMT -6
If you want reality, go join a service and fight. That will be reality if you survive. This has no bearing on the current discussion. <EDITED BY ADMIN FOR RUDE & CONDESCENDING POST>
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Jun 20, 2019 20:12:00 GMT -6
If you want reality, go join a service and fight. That will be reality if you survive. This has no bearing on the current discussion. <EDITED BY ADMIN FOR RUDE & CONDESCENDING POST>What username a member uses on the forums, as long as its not obscene/offensive, is not really your business to complain about -- especially when doing so in the manner that you do above is also rude and condescending IMO. If you have a legitimate complaint about a member you do not do this, you complain to an admin and we address it.
oldpop2000 removed the sentence in question, so lets move on and be polite and professional.
|
|
Warspite
Full Member
Sky of blue/And sea of green
Posts: 230
|
Post by Warspite on Jun 20, 2019 20:46:03 GMT -6
This has no bearing on the current discussion. <EDITED BY ADMIN FOR RUDE & CONDESCENDING POST>What username a member uses on the forums, as long as its not obscene/offensive, is not really your business to complain about -- especially when doing so in the manner that you do above is also rude and condescending IMO. If you have a legitimate complaint about a member you do not do this, you complain to an admin and we address it.
oldpop2000 removed the sentence in question, so lets move on and be polite and professional. OK. Equally can we maybe censor people who have served in some military or at least claim to have and then use that as some sort of leverage against those who have not or don't want to make a thing about it if they have on a game forum?
|
|
demol
New Member
Posts: 13
|
Post by demol on Jun 20, 2019 20:58:37 GMT -6
Not all battles are winable.(tm)
I regulary have combats arranged like "2CL vs 2CA/1CA+1BC" and have no complain when CL dies (but they can flee or do succesfull torpedo run from time to time to score at least CA)
I have other grand problem myself - AI deliberately loose all "equal size" fleet battles with losses like "1CL+4DD vs (all)BB/BC + 1-2CA". I clearly see what type of misunderstanding AI suffer in battles (line breaking, not support stragglers, fear of closing-ins with subsequent line breaking and so on) and wonder how to deal with it. Only capitall losses Ai managed to inflict was in carrier strike era (AI can micromanage air strikes better then human, solely because of micromanagement, but "not enough better" to counter fleeting flaws)
|
|