66 posts
Skills: Historical Research, Writing Events/Decisions, Modding Units, Finding Bugs, Bug Fixing, AI Programming, Graphics, Modding Countries/Leaders, Modding Provinces, Economic Balancing, Map Editing, Modding Technologies, Modding User Interface
|
Post by nguyenthepatriot on Jan 13, 2015 1:05:47 GMT
Should the AI be able to start WW3 through their event choices? Or, should the AI only be able to do so if the player is playing a superpower?
I can foresee the frustration is a player is having a satisfying campaign economically, military and diplomatically building up a second-rate power, and then suddenly find themselves a nuclear wasteland and the game ends through no action of their own.
On the other hand, it may seem rather artificial and unrealistic to the player if the superpower AI is always backing down from brinkmanship, or taking the peaceful path.
What are other members thoughts on this?
|
|
20 posts
|
Post by jetblackissp on Jan 13, 2015 4:03:29 GMT
i think it should be possible but unlikely that ww3 really starts without player involvement, if ww3 is starting every game its just as ridiculous as it never getting close to happening (castro was really the only one who wanted to have the trigger pulled in the cuban missile crisis but both powers really ignored his opinions, i guess a real world example of a minor power getting close to ww3) but i think the most likely way of starting ww3 would be through a wargame the other superpowers alert posture already high
|
|
84 posts
|
Post by HansWormhat EvW-Dev on Jan 13, 2015 4:54:36 GMT
Well back then, nobody honestly believed that a first strike would have crushed the enemy's will to react, hence M.A.D. Every scenario that would have led to war always began with escalation from a lesser conflict, namely any of the proxy wars where forces from both superpowers sometimes operated in closer proximity than they realized.
I think if the events/decision chain ever evolved enough then there would be a progressive escalation of a conflict already in progress, using a long sequence of events and decisions, and if nobody backed down then the final, end-all decision would come down to one side asking itself "Do I really want to push the button?" and then the other side reacting to that. That of course would be the solution nobody wanted and one that even the AI would try desperately hard to avoid.
|
|
2 posts
|
Post by chainosaurusrex on Jan 16, 2015 14:19:37 GMT
Both sides trying to avoid nuclear war doesn't prevent them from engaging in behavior that could lead to war
say if the Americans sank the soviet ships during the missile crisis, then the soviets might seize west Berlin or launch strikes on American nukes in turkey, which could lead to all out war, at which point the AI might do a cost benefit analysis of whether nuclear war improves its strategic position and if one side thinks it does this leads to nuclear war.
in this case there is a possibility for protracted conventional warfare before nuclear exchange
|
|
50 posts
Skills: Historical Research, Writing Events/Decisions, Finding Bugs, Economic Balancing
|
Post by warsmith17 on Jan 16, 2015 14:41:45 GMT
I believe that the possibility should be there to add tension to the game. If the superpower ai always backs down then the game will lack dynamism.
|
|
43 posts
Skills: Historical Research, Finding Bugs, Bug Fixing, Modding Countries/Leaders, Modding Provinces, Economic Balancing, Modding Technologies, Modding User Interface
|
Post by Aleksey_EvW-Dev on Jan 18, 2015 5:37:43 GMT
Should the AI be able to start WW3 through their event choices? Or, should the AI only be able to do so if the player is playing a superpower? I can foresee the frustration is a player is having a satisfying campaign economically, military and diplomatically building up a second-rate power, and then suddenly find themselves a nuclear wasteland and the game ends through no action of their own. On the other hand, it may seem rather artificial and unrealistic to the player if the superpower AI is always backing down from brinkmanship, or taking the peaceful path. What are other members thoughts on this? We cant program the AI
|
|
66 posts
Skills: Historical Research, Writing Events/Decisions, Modding Units, Finding Bugs, Bug Fixing, AI Programming, Graphics, Modding Countries/Leaders, Modding Provinces, Economic Balancing, Map Editing, Modding Technologies, Modding User Interface
|
Post by nguyenthepatriot on Jan 18, 2015 8:31:27 GMT
We have as much control over the AI as in HoI3, which is a fair amount.
|
|
110 posts
Skills: Localisation/Language Translation, Historical Research, Finding Bugs, Modding Countries/Leaders, Modding Provinces, Economic Balancing
|
Post by Viking Panda on Jan 18, 2015 9:15:58 GMT
We have as much control over the AI as in HoI3, which is a fair amount. I wonder what would happen if we just used the HoI3 ai files and imported them into EvW (maybe modifying a few things here and there to make it compatible if necessary)?
|
|
66 posts
Skills: Historical Research, Writing Events/Decisions, Modding Units, Finding Bugs, Bug Fixing, AI Programming, Graphics, Modding Countries/Leaders, Modding Provinces, Economic Balancing, Map Editing, Modding Technologies, Modding User Interface
|
Post by nguyenthepatriot on Jan 19, 2015 13:57:53 GMT
We have as much control over the AI as in HoI3, which is a fair amount. I wonder what would happen if we just used the HoI3 ai files and imported them into EvW (maybe modifying a few things here and there to make it compatible if necessary)? I doubt it would work, there are too many changes in EvW.
|
|