Greetings to All

[Russian Guard]

Greetings! After many months reading about Histwar and playing the demo, I decided to take the plunge and buy the game. Glad I did! I will probably spend as much time designing scenarios as playing them ;-)

One question: I can set up (create a new) a scenario and play it; however, I cannot seem to dictate what the AI should do with the forces not controlled by the player. I know it can be done; there's a scenario called TS_Pultusk; if you play the French, the AI Russians move the same way every time, as though they are following some initial orders (in this case, they always send units to a hill and line up in defense mode). How is this accomplished? I have set orders and saved the setup by the AI doesn't follow the orders.

Thanks for any help!

[zu Pferd]

Hello Russian Guard, welcome to the forum

when playing against the AI in this version the AI itself calculates its own plan
taking in consideration the forces arrayed in front of it.
The plan does not change because your side, the player's side also triggers a
particular response; try different approach to your attack plan/defense to observe
any response that might cause the AI to produce a different response.

If you play both sides you can control AI as 'you go I go' style of playing, without too many adjustments (player's side).
Set the plan for the French to defend and set a plan for the Russians to attack
in a particular sector, following for example a historical scenario say the Fleches at
Borodino. For Pultusk (not familiar with this battle) read the historical account
for attack or defense either side :
  You will get some outcome it might not however be the 'historical outcome'.
Join a club and participate.  Presently there is a bug in pbem  and the mp battles are not particularly balanced, however stay tuned for new developments by HistWar creator JM Mathe.                                               

[sandman]

In my understanding the essential concern was, if when designing/setting up a scenario, to be able to script/record the initial commands of either side, so that the AI adapts those at the start of the execution of the battle.

So this might be a matter for our experienced creative personal ...

[zu Pferd]

My dear Sandman,

there is no way of scripting commands in this game except playing both sides.
There are only 3 corps commands available....


In Ultimate General you can program the AI to respond in different ways prior
to starting the game.

In HistWar the AI makes its own plan; if the plan is the same its due to the human player
set up....
the AI sends out scouts to intercept your lines just as the human player does.
The AI is not a responsive AI as Mathe' pointed out in this version or the previous HW 1. A more responsive AI may get built yet for those who wish to play against the AI.

Right now we have a game which could lend very well to MP games except for the bugs
and the design flaws in 'territory ownership' for victory calculations  and others (see Gunner's last post in the Beta test)and others which in my humble understanding are being looked at and eventually fixed.

Our patron has several projects on the stove and he's by his lonesome at working out the tangles
in the web...I waited a long time and probably will have to wait some more.

[sandman]

Thank you kindly Zu Pferd.

I was trying to moderate this thread, for we have a new motivated scenario/map designer, Russian Guard, but a lack of answers to his questions.

Although I myself rather know about the limited functionality of setups for scenarios, I wasnt 100% sure about this matter, cos I only did a few experiments with the editors a pretty long time ago. So I cannot be considered as a specialist in that subject.

Therefore I was attempting to stimulate some support for new ambitious community members.

[Sidney77]

And you do it well, Mr. sandman. And not only in this thread, you are one of few here who are always ready to help anybody.

[sandman]

Well, an expert finally spoke:

single player vs AI

THEY DO: all scenarios in the depot and the ones that come in the game do in a fashion.
The AI plays a 'Napoleonic game' . Its not an overtly reactive AI (this version HW Napoleon
we have been promised a better one) Depending on the level you choose to play with and options,
the AI will draw up a plan for the side under his control.
Most players favored playing MP style games because the AI tends to be less 'all out aggressive'
it tends to keep a sizable force as a strategic reserve (see link to video https://vimeo.com/111103866)

The video of this scenario I designed I have the French defending the southern sector of the Battle of Nations.
AI controls the coalition. The video is speeded up for file size transfer.
As you can gather from watching  the action, the AI gathers up a force for an attack but keeps a force equal to
or slightly lower force as a strategic reserve: the AI does not commit all the army for the attack.
The scenario is built on a 6 km map so there is very little room to maneuver around the flanks and attempts
to incorporate :

Cavalry battle at Liebertwolkwitz 14 of October 1813
http://warfare.likamva.in/19C/Leipzig1813-TheBattleOfTheNations-ByHofschroer.htm

The Battle of Wachau and Connewitz, 16 October 1813
http://warfare.likamva.in/19C/Leipzig1813-TheBattleOfTheNations-ByHofschroer.htm

 'Total Allied losses were 80-85 officers, 2,000-2,100 men and 600-650 horses. Details of French losses are unreliable but were probably greater. It is known that they lost two generals and 96 officers as well as 800 prisoners to the Austrians.
   The battle itself ended rather inconclusively.' (the cavalry battle)

The AI does not know history when it plays the game against you ! You do !
It does not draw from the historical narrative to 're-create' the events, it simply works out a law of averages : it draws
up a force -not necessarily all guard all artillery ect but a force suitable for an assault, perhaps greater or of better
quality than the force arrayed before it...then the AI goes to work.

As I already mentioned ,the reason that the player often wins vs the AI is that its not very re-active to the
opponents moves or counter moves.
The AI plan is not open for scrutiny or programming by the player who wishes to input a better attack plan for the AI
to follow: the AI is not programmable in-game that is you can't assign an 'aggressive, defensive, cautious ' stances to it
but it does draw a little of that from the leadership in its army.

You can input by playing 'both sides'

You can adjust 'aggressiveness' and 'initiative' to each regiment in the OoB of the corps at your disposal, and the AI's...
prior to starting a battle example :
turn to middle stance (agg and ini) all 1st line troops and veterans , turn to low stance all landwehr conscript
and deserters, turn to high stance all guard and elites..for all arms of the army...this requires some research for each
regiment and the year it fought in...
the OoB stance assignment in HistWar are more then reliable, but the argument when it comes down to playing vs a human opponent is and always is : is the OoB balanced for both sides so no one has the upper hand, but the battle is fought
within the skill-set of each player.

a bit winded uh ?   

Cheers

zu

[zu Pferd]

  at your service