AACW Public beta patch 1.10 released

[Franciscus]

Speaking of AI and time, there is a game option to give the AI more time, but if feasible, I urge you to add an option to give the AI much more time, minutes more even, if that's what it takes to enhance its effectiveness. (...)

Great thought. Being (for now at least) an AI player only, I second this idea. Consider even for a moment the future possibilities: The AI could be left thinking (not only about the immediate turn, but ahead...) permanently, while the computer is on and we leave for work, sleep, etc.

[soloswolf]

Firstly, not exactly the most 'green' idea...

Secondly, Really? What is it that you think will be squeezed out of the game? It really seems that the challenge you would like to face would come very easily to you in a PBEM, and since you (clearly) don't care about rate of play, you would not mind if your opponent was slow getting his orders back to you.

[berto]

I leave my computers running full time anyway for other purposes. Do I redeem my "greenness" by the fact that I never watch TV?

Sorry, but I don't play PBEM (don't ask, won't tell). I'm strictly an AI player for my own good reasons.

[berto]

Consider even for a moment the future possibilities: The AI could be left thinking (not only about the immediate turn, but ahead...) permanently, while the computer is on and we leave for work, sleep, etc.

It's even been proposed that networked computers access a common database of shared AI "experience", so that our poor, half-wit AI opponents can band together to fight us individual human players many-to-one.

Yes, consider the future possibilities...

[soloswolf]

I don't know anything about coding, let alone programming an AI, but it seems to me there is only so much that an AI can do on it's own. Wouldn't you need advanced hardware to fully use the full extent of it's capabilities?

What exactly do you hope will come from this extra time?

[berto]

Ah, but advanced hardware is already upon us. What exactly will we do with multi-cores and GBs of memory? (Several years from now, we might easily have 8-core and even 16-core systems, even just at the mid-range.)

Not all AI's are designed in this way, but for AI's with search spaces that have the potential to be immensely large (one turn lookahead vs. two-turn lookahead vs. three-turn lookahead...), the more time you give the AI to search the moves space, the better it will do. Even Deep Blue needed time to "think" up its chess moves.

[soloswolf]

Ah, but advanced hardware is already upon us. What exactly will we do with multi-cores and GBs of memory? (Several years now, we might easily have 8-core and even 16-core systems, even just at the mid-range.)

Not all AI's are designed in this way, but for AI's with search spaces that have the potential to be immensely large (one turn lookahead vs. two-turn lookahead vs. three-turn lookahead...), the more time you give the AI to search the moves space, the better it will do. Even Deep Blue needed time to "think" up its chess moves.

But does the average player have that type of system? I doubt it. If it is not a huge process/time drain for the developers, I'd of course say to do it. Something tells me that it is not a simple fix however, and I think the game functions well now, and time could be better spent on other improvements.

[soloswolf]

As far as the patch goes: I have only played a few turns with it in my current PBEM, but it seems solid so far.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[berto]

But does the average player have that type of system? I doubt it. If it is not a huge process/time drain for the developers, I'd of course say to do it. Something tells me that it is not a simple fix however, and I think the game functions well now, and time could be better spent on other improvements.

Most new computers nowadays are at least dual-core. Intel and AMD (and ???) want us to keep buying new computers, and to push that, they have plans to keep piling on the CPU cores. 8-core and 16-core systems are in our not too distant future. (We bought a shiny new--and expensive!--8-core Mac Pro in February. I'm hoping it won't become obsolescent before five years from now.)

You're right, these suggested AI extensions are not something for this version, or even this generation, of AACW or any of the other AGEod games. Maybe AACW2. But something for AGEod to think about for the future.

[berto]

I leave my computer running full time when I am home and awake, otherwise it gets turned off and in the case of the Wireless Laptop (disconnected from any external connections). I have had the misfortune of being fried by "lightning strikes" that came in once via power lines and another separate time via cable connection. If I'm asleep or not home, I can't react to bad weather and I don't wish to go thru the experience a third time.

I have web servers and firewalls that require full-time operation, so turning them off is not an option. I also access other computers across our personal networks (we have four! :eek throughout the day and night. So I can't really turn most of our systems off. I have the best power-line filtering and UPS technology that money can buy, though. And I have excellent backup and disaster recovery plans and regimens in place.

[pepe4158]

Say I just want the RR bug fixed whenever you guys can?...As I am relatively happy with everything else.

[GShock]

Fact: Chessmaster 10th Edition (but we could say the same about the first Chessmaster program for Amiga 500!) thinks deep. As deep as the time you give him to think.

The program itself is but a library of "recorded" games. What the AI does is *adapt* an unknown position (Regardless of whether it comes before or after the openings are complete) to its deep thinking.

The better the program the deeper the AI can go. But the point is that if Chessmaster's AI is can think with the current hardware it means it's not a matter of hardware.

Pocus is definitely up to the task, it's a matter of priorities, not of hardware or of coding.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Pocus]

Say I just want the RR bug fixed whenever you guys can?...As I am relatively happy with everything else.

You mean the AI problems with fixing the RR? This is a planned improvement yes, but give us some days on that.

[W.Barksdale]

Pocus, first off, good job! I think Athena is MUCH improved over prior versions. However, I still don't believe she covers her strategic sites properly.

Playing as the Federals, for 1861, I pretty much let her run around to see what her new capabilities are. At first she seemed to be causing more trouble than a moose on the interstate. However, she religiously covers the Shenandoah valley, meanwhile lets me concentrate my army between her forces and Richmond.

While she managed to take Pittsburg she lost her Capitol, with no chance of winning now. A good trade if you ask me.

In case you want to check out what she was thinking here is the game with current and past 3 turns.

[bk6583]

Hi Pocus,

Admittedly I had installed the beta patch after I was well into a CSA campaign I started in 1862 so that may be a factor. But as you can see from the attached file, the Union left the door to DC wide open while it chased a chimera at Harpers Ferry. I moved all three CSA corps from Alexandria into DC with full attack, easily took it and won the game (Union morale was 75 at the time with a lose threshold of 60. Know your plate is always full but I hope, like the CSA's penchent for not covering Richmond, that you might be able to address this. I can't tell though how much I've enjoyed this game!

[Brochgale]

Got butt kicked again on hard?Athena just targeted Jacksons Corp and 2 divisions of 18 elements that I had carefully constructed and - utterly destroyed it. Jackson gets all blame yet Johnson sits on side as usual and does nothing and gets rewarded? - yet again Johson contradicts orders given to him - in my next game he gets sent to Alaska? leure:

Shortly after this debacle with JPT Beau outflanked and Johsons Corps sitting doing its usual - nothing. Richmond falls

[W.Barksdale]

Reinforcements are not showing up when lots of units are ordered.
Note the units ordered in the backup1. None of the Missouri or Arkansas units appear next turn.

[soloswolf]

I have noticed two things...

1) Evasion seems WAY off. Huge federal stacks have been bypassing any and all obstacles in front of them. Crossing rivers, going through ZoC, bypassing my entrenched forces. I don't think I have caught a single stack in this pbem.

2) Replacements seem to get used much, much faster. I can't keep any stocks up, even on turns with little to no combat. It seems like even one hit will take away a whole replacement 'point'.

[runyan99]

2) Replacements seem to get used much, much faster. I can't keep any stocks up, even on turns with little to no combat. It seems like even one hit will take away a whole replacement 'point'.

Do you have the Historical Attrition option on? If so, that's as designed. All regiments slowly degrade over time, so you'll have to use more replacements, or have understrength units in the long run.

[soloswolf]

Do you have the Historical Attrition option on? If so, that's as designed. All regiments slowly degrade over time, so you'll have to use more replacements, or have understrength units in the long run.

I do, but this is a foolish amount of red. And it's not a slow thing. If it is what it is, I can learn to deal with it, but it seems a tad much so far.

[runyan99]

It isn't heavily tested yet, so you could be right. At the same time many Civil War regiments attritted quite quickly, and consisted of only a few hundred men, so keep that in mind also.

[pepe4158]

Hi Pocus,

Admittedly I had installed the beta patch after I was well into a CSA campaign I started in 1862 so that may be a factor. But as you can see from the attached file, the Union left the door to DC wide open while it chased a chimera at Harpers Ferry. I moved all three CSA corps from Alexandria into DC with full attack, easily took it and won the game (Union morale was 75 at the time with a lose threshold of 60. Know your plate is always full but I hope, like the CSA's penchent for not covering Richmond, that you might be able to address this. I can't tell though how much I've enjoyed this game!

Yeah Bk that might be the reasons...I play the full campeigns and the first year she covers DC pretty well in the new patch...of about 6 reloads (restarts after a year) I got her once in the DC exploit, pretty low odds I think.

[soloswolf]

An entire cavalry division under Stuart was just wiped out. Set on defend/retreat if engaged, evade. The second in command was also slain.

Also only one of my two corps engaged over DAYS of combat. Stuart was independent in the region with his division, Jackson's Corps did all of the fighting (other than the soon to be wiped out-ought to have retreated ten times over cavalry division) and Lee's Army stack that was in the same region did nothing.

Also, in TN, the three river zones of the Cumberland that border the North of Nashville were all completely blockaded and somehow did not stop a corps of federal troops from moving across them into Nashville.

Any thoughts?

[Pocus]

Thanks, I'll fetch your save about strategic positionning in some days!

Patch going official now!

Again, thanks all for your input!

[pepe4158]

Hmmm this new patch sure changes the game quite a bit IMO; for some unexplainable reason, I am having higher attrition losses, I keep having to buy more replacements then I am use to. Not complaining myself, actually suspending judgement for now, and just trying to get a feel for the game against Solo.
It does however make the north side a little stronger I think, as it is easier slightly for the north to deal with these losses, as against Solo I am usually having to buy 6-8 lined Inf EVERY turn in the replacement pool....n I imagine its harder for him to keep up, hence he sees his staggering losses.
I am not trying to make light of Solo, for complaining about his losses, just interesting to note that as he is complaining about his losses, he was the WINNER (not loser like me) of all these battles, I was just fortunate enough to take almost equal losses with me (lost slightly more in causalties) and am buying HORDES of replacement men each turn, as I CANT buy new units (losing too many men per turn)....only replacements.
Also interesting that I can utterly crush Athena as the north on normal setting....but really struggling as the south in my own game against the AI too just hold her at bay as she is really aggressive....as the north she can afford to be under these settings....seems to really get her in trouble as the south as I just destroyed her main army at Harpers in my latest game.....I suspect due to the higher attrition losses of some kind?

[Pocus]

Do you have Historical attrition enabled or not? If not then it is a problem.

[Inside686]

I didn't notice higher attrition in "historic attrition" mode disabled

[pepe4158]

It isn't heavily tested yet, so you could be right. At the same time many Civil War regiments attritted quite quickly, and consisted of only a few hundred men, so keep that in mind also.

Hmmm correct me if I am wrong here Run, but you always have some form of attrition going on correct? I mean one of the attrition boxes must be checked, and since Solo is most upset in lossing his cavalry division, that if I recall was directly attacked, even to move in retreat they would suffer some form of attrition, right?