Pocus wrote:I think DGold is right. In fact the problem is a bit complex, but the result is has he said. Sometime the AI consider too much the overall strategic situation and keep too strong defences, even if local opportunities served on a silver plate are nearby. (take note that generally the AI in other games think opposite to that, by moving into a local trap without considering the overall strategic situation)
I know of this problem and I will work on that too.
PhilThib wrote:I do not share the last analysis: forces in Nova Scotia would take almost 6 months to reach New England by land, while leaving NS unprotected all the time (and Halifax is a key English strategic town)...
This would open the door for a French raid there...
So, comparing the time lost / assets at risk, the AI decision there is wise.
D.J. Hawkman wrote:Funny ...I think the AI is rather "Good"......I'm playing Full Campgain FIW....getting ready to Assault Fort Oswego....
When a British Relief Force shows up
leure: and Foils my ..feeble Militia/Indian Horde...
![]()
I was playing on the Normal mode........
I do agree with the taking "Winter Quarters Earlier"...I was entering Winter...thinking that my French men were safe......until a Siege is setup on Fort Duquesne...in November....
We held...but those poor Brits...froze their "Bum's Off"......
![]()
pasternakski wrote: Be careful when "tweaking" things on the basis of forum suggestions. I have seen much harm done to games by another publisher (which shall remain nameless, but its initials are Matrix Games) from hasty database changes that don't wind up fixing anything and break things that weren't broken before. Many of these changes were made in response to popular clamor for this, that, and the other.
It ruined things for me, and I have sworn off ever buying games from them again as a result. Designs that had some potential (though poorly developed) went completely awry in the rush to keep the masses happy. Remember that this is YOUR design, and it needs only be changed because YOU think it is necessary after being thoroughly persuaded of the necessity for the change.
Please. AGEOD has done marvelous work with this design by deciding on a specifically organized plan working toward a clearly defined objective.
PhilThib wrote:Yes, this is all the more important...and in addition very realistic...Apart from Washington 1776's december campaign (Trenton & Princeton), there was almost no winter operations in those 18th Century wars...
'[FS wrote: Feltan']Speaking of suggestions.....
You are correct about winter campaigns in the 18th Century. Sitting comfortably in a centrally heated and well insulated house with a well stocked refrigerator, we forget how close to nature these people lived. Winter for them was a time of hardship and privation.
I might suggest also that activation levels for leaders in frozen or snow areas be reduced. An offensive during these conditions should really be rare, and surprise to the defender!
Regards,
Feltan
(take note that generally the AI in other games think opposite to that, by moving into a local trap without considering the overall strategic situation)
pasternakski wrote:
It ruined things for me, and I have sworn off ever buying games from them again as a result. Designs that had some potential (though poorly developed) went completely awry in the rush to keep the masses happy. Remember that this is YOUR design, and it needs only be changed because YOU think it is necessary after being thoroughly persuaded of the necessity for the change.
...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests