I agree, it seems that in many areas the AI is trying to do clever things but is making a mess of them and ends up doing less than in MA.
On one game I declared my first SA and found the PL declared next to me, four tanks. On their first go they attacked, but on the second he withdrew from his border and placed a few units there. Needless to say I then proceeded to invade and take the territory. WTF?
It's nice to see something different from the utterly tedious and predictable LAV/Mortar setup, followed by tanks from the second front, but it really does drop some clangers. On the upside, the AI doesn't pussy foot around as much when it comes to invading neutrals... mostly a good thing, but sometimes it should turn around and move to another battle.
Its transport handling is poor at best. It deployed a tank and an Ostrich in a rather ineffecient way, though nothing too bad. It then proceeded to move its transport into a corner and leave it there, despite there being many good uses for that transport.
See the attached replay for an example of me exploiting the AI flaws (What a comeback!) to win a game I would never have won against a human opponent. You'll see the transport usage I mentioned in it.
This is my third world war, I haven't lost one yet, and based on this replay I never will.
IMO the unit choices at the beginning are better, but some of its tactical decisions seem worse (as you mentioned, its targetting for one doesn't seem as good). and I have witnessed a couple of insane ones, such as the withdrawal from the border (Second World War Win). It does also seem to over use bunkers.
I was really hoping this was due to the AI being on medium. However, this, combined with the subscription model, means I think I'll have to be giving this one a miss. Sorry guys.
_________________ "Massive Assault is a game for those, who like to think. In this game random factor exists without doubt, but it doesn't play a decisive role." - Tiger
|