Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CCIP
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Der Teddy Bar
What SHIII sorely missed that has made it so easy to sail up and down the English Coastline as if you own it is that there is no overiding AI in the forma of a Coastal Command.
Essentiall, in SHIII, the AI forgets that you ever where there is under an hour .
It needs to be that if you sink a ship in location A that staying there is dangerous so it is best to move to location B.
|
To sum this up, it's what I've been saying all along:
SHIII has tactical AI (which is far from perfect), but lacks a strategic AI (all "strategic" movements are purely random and aren't in any way affected by a player's actions).
The lack of a strategic AI is what, to me, disqualifies SHIII from having a true dynamic campaign (as opposed to Falcon 4.0, for example). I think this is something that a real dynamic subsim will need.
It's probably a big undertaking, and I seriously doubt we'll see it in SHIV. Granted, I'd be willing to let it go if it means more work on the tactical AI - I'd rather have a fully-working tactical AI than a half-working tactical AI (as we have it now) and a half-working strategic AI.
:hmm: |
Actually, last night I was thinking about how certain strategic elements could be implemented into the SHIV campaign.
Anybody ever play the game Pacific War? Convoys were crucial in the game. Say a 6,000 ton maru is carrying "150 units" of supplies to a distant Japanese garrison. If it gets sunk, the supplies fail to arrive, and the forces at the merchant's destination can no longer hold out as long.
If I sink a troop transport, all of the AFVs and artillery pieces are lost, and the game calculates how many troops are killed depending on how long it takes the ship to sink. If you sink an aircraft carrier, Japenese offensive operations are curtailed in that area due to loss of air cover. If you sink a destroyer, it will makes everyone's job easier in the long run. And so on. Tankers are crucial, sink enough of them and the Japanese war machine grinds to a halt.
With a random computer-controlled campaign, you wouldn't fight the same war over and over. Midway might not happen, Bataan might not fall, the Japenese might capture North Australia, and so on. A basic submarine AI on both sides could implemented (the AI commander would send them strategic locations to support current operations). I know many are clamoring for sub AI, but at the very least, the player should run into their own side every now and then (with a chance of friendly fire in poor weather!), and be presented with a weekly report of enemy sinkings, and SIGINT reports of axis operations.
Why I find such things interesting is because the US submarine force succeded where the German failed: it almost strangled the Japanese empire. Perhaps not as fascinating as the Atlantic, but more interesting on a "nuts-and-bolts" strategic level, where every major sinking hurts Japan in the end.