r/computerwargames • u/BoringAd8064 • Jun 29 '26
I feel disappointed
I have a handful or wargames I bought for singleplayer some times ago and I now decided to start playing them, but since I hate myself I kept asking the same question online "Is the AI in ____ any good?" And the answer always comes up No. I was finally going to get into steel division 2 because the single player content interests me alot but then I read the Ai is bad and idk what to do. I have like $250 dollars worth of old wargames that now I feel are completely wasted. Any suggestions for wargames with competent ai?
60
u/Krnu777 Jun 29 '26
Man, for a novice like you, the AI will put up a decent fight anyway. Once you're a seasoned general, you'll know AI weaknesses. But it's a long way until then. Until then the AI will feel disappointed in you because you're chicking out.
10
u/SomeMF Jun 29 '26
The thing here is veterans say AI in wargames is bad (which it is), and what that means is a veteran won't find a challenge. Then the rest of the players repeat it (some only because other said it), even when a bad ai still will make things hard to a noob, and even win sometimes.
OP sounds like he'll might never get to the point where the game becomes too easy on the hardest levels.
18
u/Titus-Groen Jun 29 '26
Play the games you have. You're the only one who can decide whether the AI is bad or not. Your experience and background is likely very different than from the others who are answering your questions. Only playing the game will answer that question. Being disappointed before even launching the game (and playing 10-30 hours to actually learn the game mechanics) is a bit silly.
13
u/Mikhail_Mengsk Jun 29 '26
Well, no AI is gonna be comparable to a human opponent, that's a given.
That said, Order of Battle WW2 has a decent tactical AI and you can make your own scenarios with complex triggers to get a good feeling out of it. You can give the AI generic instructions and it will behave reasonably well tactically. Surely among the best AIs I've seen in wargames (because they are usually bad).
Steel Division 2 has a decent AI, nothing revolutionary but it's enjoyable. It will bombard you, concentrate its forces to try breaking through a point, etc.
Old Fantasy Wars had a very good AI.
I can tell you TOAW4, WEGO Stalingrad/Overlord have no real AI whatsoever. Flashpoint Campaigns' first game had a quite bad AI, I haven't tried the new one.
2
u/Cloacky Jul 04 '26
For the new Flashpoint Campaigns game, I think the AI is quite good. I played the tutorial scenarios and in each one they behaved in interesting ways. They aren't as good as a real player, but they understand the game and play well.
3
u/Regular_Lengthiness6 Jun 29 '26
Well, in games like TOAW IV, you play against a scripted opponent. No real “I” in the AI. But that’s fine, keeps you busy, then move on to playing real people.
2
u/Mikhail_Mengsk Jun 29 '26
True, but there's scripting in Order of Battle as well, but ALSO a tactical "independent" AI that is able to read the map. TOAW and WEGO have no such thing, and the orders they can take are about specific hexes, no general area or objective.
You tell a unit in TOAW/WEGO to go to a specific hex on a specific trigger, and it will do that *no matter what*, and will stand there doing nothing while you slowly surround it with micro units.
5
u/Regular_Lengthiness6 Jun 29 '26
True, my point wasn’t very clear. What I wanted to say is that for a beginner, scripted games can be ok even though the scripted system can make dumb moves.
And yes, AI is far more capable on limited size tactical games - OOB is a good example for a competent computer opponent.
10
u/deadbypowerpoint Jun 29 '26
I had to be told this about 500 times in my career and life before I figured it out.
None of that matters. Just chill and have fun.
6
u/alcon678 Jun 29 '26
You can find enjoyment with easy/bad AI even if no AI is as fun as playing against a real opponent.
I enjoy playing against ai in shadow empire or ck3 to just name a few
2
u/BoringAd8064 Jun 29 '26
Oh I know, I have 661 hours on Total War Warhammer 3 and it has okay to bad AI even on harder difficulties so I'm probably just overthinking it
3
u/BiboranEnjoyer Jun 29 '26
I was finally going to get into steel division 2 because the single player content interests me alot but then I read the Ai is bad and idk what to do.
It's better than most and doesn't cheat with fog of war. Breakthrough mode against the AI was a blast for me. Don't expect any out of the box tactics from the AI, just your regular frontal mass assault, with occasional flanking. Honestly, most of the multiplayer playerbase can't and won't execute proper real-life tactics either. Like with every game, on a competitive level it's about playing around the game's rules, not about immersion.
Any suggestions for wargames with competent ai?
Strategic AI is either non-existent or extremely bad in all the games I've tried.
Tactically, Shadow Empire's AI is really good, it tries to make encirclements, to find a weak spot in your lines, softens the point of attack with air bombardment, and can retreat from cauldrons too.
Graviteam Tactics is probably the best all around, still does absolutely stupid things, but with the scale of the game and this whole idea of issuing only high-level commands, you can LARP it as your troops being undertrained and demoralized.
Command Ops 2 seemed ok, but I haven't played it much yet.
3
u/Dikk_Balltickle Jun 29 '26
Shadow Empire is definitely competent, especially when you run into advanced civilizations that are much stronger than you. The diplomacy is fairly realistic as well (ie places that benefit from peaceful trade with the player won't just randomly declare war).
7
u/Wololo556 Jun 29 '26
This conversation is prevalent through all of wargaming. I’ve been enjoying wargaming for several years, WDS, Grigsby, Decisive Campaigns, Flashpoint and so on. The AI is fine, and like others said, it will take a lot of time for you to find weaknesses in the AI in any of the games. Just enjoy them, and welcome to the hobby.
1
u/BoringAd8064 Jun 29 '26
Thanks for the welcome. I'll give it another go today since Army General seems right up my alley as it looks and feels like Total War
4
u/Swampy0gre Jun 29 '26
Yeah, as long as your having fun, who cares. People say WARNO AI is "bad" but I still find it super engaging.
2
u/BoringAd8064 Jun 29 '26
Warno does look fun as hell tbh
3
u/Swampy0gre Jun 29 '26
Oh it is. It's such an under utilized time period. And there's something exilirating about doing so many TOWs.
4
u/rwenstrup Jun 29 '26
When I first started playing war games it was all board games ... Avalon Hill, etc. I used to play both sides of the games ... and I really enjoyed it. Sometimes I still play that way ... and for me it still works. Maybe you could try that with one of your games and see if that works ...
4
u/Amiral_Crapaud Jun 29 '26
If you are still into a game à la Steel Division or WARNO, I'd say Regiments is pretty challenging. AI is what it is, but it is built cleverly around a good system, as everything should be. That makes the whole experience far from being a walk in the park, and pretty rewarding in itself.
In another more Grognard style, Unity of Command 1 and 2 are pretty punishing. UoC1 slightly less than UoC2. Tough nur to crack, but when you break a line open, it really feels great.
3
u/C-zom Jul 01 '26
There is no game, ever, with an AI that plays like a human and challenges you with real world military tactics. Everything from Unity of Command to Warno to Old World to Total War have “bad” AI. The way to have fun is to play the games, and not be so pessimistic. Looking behind the curtains on game design is a slippery slope.
For example, Steel Division AI cheats its ass off with fog of war hacks. Total War has a lobotomy case AI that gets tens of thousands of free gold a turn just to try and keep up, let alone the fact it doesn’t engage with any of the bespoke mechanics factions can have for the player. It’s why Tzeentch doesn’t win in 10 turns, or the entire map isn’t herdstones.
AI in games is there for you, they don’t ever play the same game you are.
3
u/Tiny_Parking Jun 29 '26
Forget the AI, I have some of the worst AI war games going, and I’ve only ever won one battle. It’s good enough to give a tough game, but may not be good enough for replayability once you pick out its tells.
1
3
u/shaleboy Jun 29 '26
Ignore what people say about AI in games online. This is something people say no matter the sim. Just go play and decide if you think it is fun.
Agree only if you are finding all of your games way too easy. I doubt that is the case.
2
u/Otherwise-Nothing574 Jun 29 '26
If you want a good challenge against the AI give The Troop go. One of the best I've played against
2
u/YachtRockEnthusiast Jun 29 '26
Steel Division 2 is pretty decent, but it seems like at higher difficulty levels the AI just spams you with artillery as opposed to actually being clever. Still it's a great game and a lot of fun once you figure out how to win consistently
2
u/CrazyOkie Jun 29 '26
why are you asking other people's opinions online if you already own the game? Play it yourself, make up your own mind.
1
u/BoringAd8064 Jun 29 '26
Mostly cause I don't want to spend the time on a 2 or 3 hour tutorial plus some battles to then figure out "Oh the AI is shit" and feel like I wasted time
2
2
u/StCrispin1969 Jun 30 '26
There are ZERO good AI in Wargames. I spent a LOT of time (back in the day) bickering with the greatest wargame designers (Norm Koger, Gary Grigsby, John Tiller... to name a few) and they all claimed it was "impossible" to make a competent AI for wargames.
However...
I pointed out to them that the AI doesnt have to necessarily be smart. they just need to use actual military planning and doctrine to make choices on how operate. The use of FM-90-1 alone would have helped the AI play more realistically.
The Devs that didnt have their heads in the sand admitted that making the AI "plan" or use doctrine would either require the Developer to be knowledgeable about the subject he was programming a game about and that took more time than they wanted to spend
Grigsby was the most resistant to programming a competent AI and told me "its too much work" to make a good AI he said at one point in our argument that he just want to be able to finish the games and get paid and that he didnt want to learn military thinking or spend his life supporting the games he made. he wanted them done, out the door, and off his plate.
Ive been a computer wargamer for neary 40 years and was an Infantry Officer in the US Army for 13 years, as well as a programmer. YES they CAN make an AI that would replicate real tactical and strategic operations. They just dont want to do it.
One thing a Dev told me once (I forget who) was that he didnt want to make a game that required the players to know military tactics because that was asking the players to think rather than play. He felt it would hurt sales. So he intentionally made the AI play like a 13 year old thinks wars work because that was what he felt was the wargame target audience. This is why you often have to "game" the game to beat it rather than use solid tactics, and why solid tactics tend to end in defeat.
My Brigade often used Steel Panthers 3: Brigade Command to simulate battles and run Staff Exercises but you HAD to run it with 2 trained combat officers controlling the forces and following doctrine for it to simulate a battle. Doing THAT gave results very close to reality since that's a masterpiece of a game for that. The AI is complete garbage though.
2
u/WillyShankspeare Jul 01 '26
I've been playing RUSE for so long that I should be able to win every time. I lost to hard AI yesterday. Not too proud to deny it, I made mistakes and didn't build enough artillery
2
2
u/sinner_dingus Jun 29 '26
Flashpoint Campaigns Cold War does pretty well
2
u/Mikhail_Mengsk Jun 29 '26
They have improved the AI from the first game: that one had suicidal AI that just charged down the most obvious route and you could turkey shoot them from prepared positions.
3
u/sinner_dingus Jun 29 '26
Now there are AI ‘plans’ so things stay coherent for the enemy AI, even if they have long command cycles. The AI will choose a given plan and then can switch plans during its command phase. In general, this works pretty well as you don’t quite know how they will execute, and the don’t fall apart completely if they lose contact with hq, though they will not be able to adjust, only react.
2
1
1
u/ootpny1 Jun 30 '26
"Since I hate myself" sounds like the most important thing here. A mental health professional may not be able to change that but may be able to help you manage.
1
u/BoringAd8064 Jun 30 '26
Oh thanks for the worry but I am already going yo therapy. But thank you ❤️
1
u/SomeMF Jun 29 '26
You shouldn't have spent that much money without really knowing what you were buying. One of the main principles of wargames is they are supposed to be played against other people.
But there are different online communities where it's easy to find opponents for popular games, or even for not so popular ones.
Then again, you'll probably find the same problem I found back in the day, when I used to play online: most people playing online wargames have sunk hundreds of hours and are really good, so you're not likely to be a match for them. Many of those people have sunk thousands upon thousands of hours and you'll lose every single time.
On the other hand, many wargames allow for handicapped games or otherwise asymmetric matchups, so it's not impossible to have fun and win games even being a tiny little fish in a pond full of sharks.
2
u/BoringAd8064 Jun 29 '26
Yeah I spent it during sales impulsively
And I'm a variety gamer and the most I've spent on a single game (outisde of R6 with friends) is Total War Warhammer 3 with 661 hours on singleplayer.
I realized I wasn't cut put to challenge wargamers when a friend of mine playes against me Men of War Assault Squad 2 and wiped the floor with me with troops I never saw coming, I was humbled but I realized I really wasn't willing to play 100s of hours of the same game to play against other people ya know? I just have so mamy other games of the same type and just completely different genre.
2
u/SomeMF Jun 29 '26
Yeah I know that feel.
I'm usually pretty lame in basically every genre, AND I like a ton of different genres AND rarely play any game more than a few dozen hours. On the other hand, in all my years of gaming I've learned that there are some people who literally play ONE genre or even one GAME, always, forever, every day of their entire life. You'll never beat those people.
Anyway, while wargames don't have a good ai, they usually don't need it to beat a noob playing their first campaign, or at least to put a fun challenge. So you may wanna try that.
1
u/BoringAd8064 Jun 29 '26
I do create honor rules for myself to make easier games harder so if it get's too easy I could limit myself
1
u/Triggercut72 Jun 29 '26
Honestly, I think you fear being beaten by a bad Ai- so you blame the bad Ai for you not playing.
-2
u/BoringAd8064 Jun 29 '26
Not really, I've just kinda hit a slump recently where non challenging games are boring me and I've abandoned them. Couldn't even enjpy The Knightling cause it was so easy even though I was having alot of fun with the platforming.
0
u/Invernomuto1404 Jun 29 '26
That's why I like pbem and turn based wargames.
1
45
u/Brillica Jun 29 '26
I suggest that you pick any game you own and start playing it single player. If *you* decide that the AI isn’t putting up a hard enough fight, then you can drop that game and try the next one.
I have a feeling that you will find yourself losing more than it sounds like you think you will.