The enemy's ai is cheating?

[Major Ace]

I have been playing this game for a while and after playing this game and it's sister game Tank warfare Tunisia, I have noticed how much the enemy ai cheats.

Just a few examples of ai cheating: Had several infantry units are unable to see the infantry in front of them when their constantly firing and light flares being shot over them. Then they proceeded to destroy one of my infantry squads that was hiding in darkness, not firing and undetected out of nowhere. Not the first time this has happened either. In general enemy ai or towed guns seem to perform like elite units when manned by low morale/experienced green troops meanwhile my actually trained units struggle against their troops.

The ai can see or has a general idea of where your units are, as often I could have a very long and strong frontline with a very small gap or weakpoint, and guess what? Very often the ai moves through there and flanks my units, how in the world did they know exactly where that weakpoint was and how did they avoid all detection by my recon/infantry units?

Ai can deploy their units behind my line, had multiple at guns stationed in the rear get destroyed because a enemy infantry squad could deploy far behind.

Another known thing is that the ai deploys after you and therefore can deploy their units in a perfect spot, so if you got a armored platoon behind that slope they will deploy their AT guns in the perfect spot which gives them a huge advantage as I have to guess or think where they may go or deploy while they just now exactly where my units are deployed.

Meanwhile allied ai is beyond useless, like there is one at gun which destroyed 4 allied ai tanks because allied ai just charges and doesn't even bother firing or using any ''Ai advantage'' that the enemy has. So 4 low strenght enemy ai platoons survived a 16 platoon onslaught mostly due to the increased accuracy of ai units and the allied ai charging.

I get that balancing ai is hard, but some of these cheats make playing normally pretty difficult and some campaign have as a objective for allied ai to conserve forces, which is hard to achieve when the allied ai just charges with no thought. I am not the only one who has noticed this.

If you got any explanations feel free to share it but at this point I feel like there's explanation other than ai playing by different rules.

[Zephyr]

The AI generally does not cheat, especially not while positioning units :). That is a major selling point of the GT games.

As far as I am aware allied AI and enemy AI are much the same :). You can easily see that when you have only a small force and most of the fight is done by two AI forces.

Line of sight, enemy detection etc works all the same way on the player controlled forces and the AI forces.

Believe me :).

I have played the game completely hands of for years basically without giving orders during the actual battle. I would have noticed if the AI cheats, especially if it were so drastic as you seem to believe :).

Please look here for a ton material and videos from my side.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/312980/discussions/0/4203616558104679350/

You can also watch videos from other experienced players like Tonci. We all would have really, really complained very loudly about heavily cheating AI :).

[Major Ace]

Originally posted by Zephyr:

The AI generally does not cheat, especially not while positioning units :). That is a major selling point of the GT games.

As far as I am aware allied AI and enemy AI are much the same :). You can easily see that when you have only a small force and most of the fight is done by two AI forces.

Line of sight, enemy detection etc works all the same way on the player controlled forces and the AI forces.

Believe me :).

I have played the game completely hands of for years basically without giving orders during the actual battle. I would have noticed if the AI cheats, especially if it were so drastic as you seem to believe :).

Please look here for a ton material and videos from my side.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/312980/discussions/0/4203616558104679350/

You can also watch videos from other experienced players like Tonci. We all would have really, really complained very loudly about heavily cheating AI :).

I appreciate the links but it doesn't change my views that much, my ai forces that were like 12 platoons + armored support folded against 3 heavily reduced in strenght enemy ai platoons in a open field with no foxholes or entrenchments and two at guns. They are not in any way equal.

About the position of units, I have seen this more than enough times especially in tank warfare tunisia. Did a experiment by playing tanks in different areas of the map against enemy at guns, and wouldn't you know it. There was always a enemy at gun platoon always placed perfectly to counter my armoured units no matter where I placed them. I don't really buy the enemy ai doesn't cheat at all. I get that if your a very good player the cheating gets mitigated as you have good tactics to give yourself the upper hand and so you may not notice that much. but for a player who isn't a mastermind in this game it is definately clear that ai is not playing by the same rules-

[Mehl]

Originally posted by Major Ace:

Originally posted by Zephyr:

The AI generally does not cheat, especially not while positioning units :). That is a major selling point of the GT games.

As far as I am aware allied AI and enemy AI are much the same :). You can easily see that when you have only a small force and most of the fight is done by two AI forces.

Line of sight, enemy detection etc works all the same way on the player controlled forces and the AI forces.

Believe me :).

I have played the game completely hands of for years basically without giving orders during the actual battle. I would have noticed if the AI cheats, especially if it were so drastic as you seem to believe :).

Please look here for a ton material and videos from my side.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/312980/discussions/0/4203616558104679350/

You can also watch videos from other experienced players like Tonci. We all would have really, really complained very loudly about heavily cheating AI :).

I appreciate the links but it doesn't change my views that much, my ai forces that were like 12 platoons + armored support folded against 3 heavily reduced in strenght enemy ai platoons in a open field with no foxholes or entrenchments and two at guns. They are not in any way equal.

About the position of units, I have seen this more than enough times especially in tank warfare tunisia. Did a experiment by playing tanks in different areas of the map against enemy at guns, and wouldn't you know it. There was always a enemy at gun platoon always placed perfectly to counter my armoured units no matter where I placed them. I don't really buy the enemy ai doesn't cheat at all. I get that if your a very good player the cheating gets mitigated as you have good tactics to give yourself the upper hand and so you may not notice that much. but for a player who isn't a mastermind in this game it is definately clear that ai is not playing by the same rules-

tanks don't arrive anywhere quietly or discreetly, what your seeing in the AI's placement is a representation of the fact that your tanks didn't magically appear in the starting point of your mission "undetected"

AI (and your) placements are done on the basis of "Known Unknowns", if the AI has intel (audible, visual, air, etc) that your tanks are deployed on a certain point its not very well going to point it's AT guns the wrong way on the other side of the map?

at least that's my understanding of AI "predictive" behaviour

[Major Ace]

Originally posted by Mehl:

Originally posted by Major Ace:

I appreciate the links but it doesn't change my views that much, my ai forces that were like 12 platoons + armored support folded against 3 heavily reduced in strenght enemy ai platoons in a open field with no foxholes or entrenchments and two at guns. They are not in any way equal.

About the position of units, I have seen this more than enough times especially in tank warfare tunisia. Did a experiment by playing tanks in different areas of the map against enemy at guns, and wouldn't you know it. There was always a enemy at gun platoon always placed perfectly to counter my armoured units no matter where I placed them. I don't really buy the enemy ai doesn't cheat at all. I get that if your a very good player the cheating gets mitigated as you have good tactics to give yourself the upper hand and so you may not notice that much. but for a player who isn't a mastermind in this game it is definately clear that ai is not playing by the same rules-

tanks don't arrive anywhere quietly or discreetly, what your seeing in the AI's placement is a representation of the fact that your tanks didn't magically appear in the starting point of your mission "undetected"

AI (and your) placements are done on the basis of "Known Unknowns", if the AI has intel (audible, visual, air, etc) that your tanks are deployed on a certain point its not very well going to point it's AT guns the wrong way on the other side of the map?

at least that's my understanding of AI "predictive" behaviour

It makes sense but why can the ai then place their units undetected as well? I can not see or know in any way where the enemies tanks are unless their consentrated on a very small square area. That's is just what I am telling you in this post, you explained why they can but not we as the player.

[Mehl]

Originally posted by Major Ace:

Originally posted by Mehl:

tanks don't arrive anywhere quietly or discreetly, what your seeing in the AI's placement is a representation of the fact that your tanks didn't magically appear in the starting point of your mission "undetected"

AI (and your) placements are done on the basis of "Known Unknowns", if the AI has intel (audible, visual, air, etc) that your tanks are deployed on a certain point its not very well going to point it's AT guns the wrong way on the other side of the map?

at least that's my understanding of AI "predictive" behaviour

It makes sense but why can the ai then place their units undetected as well? I can not see or know in any way where the enemies tanks are unless their consentrated on a very small square area. That's is just what I am telling you in this post, you explained why they can but not we as the player.

fair enough, thats kind of the same case as far as i can tell?

as you point out you also know which "squares" the enemy tanks will be forced to deploy in, so you then tend to point your guns in the right direction and most suitable/effective locations right?

i do agree though, that the AI can be guilty of META placements of assets(88's, etc.) in locations they have no business being without having been spotted well ahead of the actual battle, this always results in a complete "backfire" however and those assets are almost always first to die because they are too exposed.

( i handicap myself in this way, by not deploying assets in locations they simply would never have been able to get into without the enemy seeing/firing on them)

[Major Ace]

Originally posted by Mehl:

Originally posted by Major Ace:

It makes sense but why can the ai then place their units undetected as well? I can not see or know in any way where the enemies tanks are unless their consentrated on a very small square area. That's is just what I am telling you in this post, you explained why they can but not we as the player.

fair enough, thats kind of the same case as far as i can tell?

as you point out you also know which "squares" the enemy tanks will be forced to deploy in, so you then tend to point your guns in the right direction and most suitable/effective locations right?

i do agree though, that the AI can be guilty of META placements of assets(88's, etc.) in locations they have no business being without having been spotted well ahead of the actual battle.
( i handicap myself in this way, by not deploying assets in locations they simply would never have been able to get into without the enemy seeing/firing on them)

Keep in mind you often don't know exactly which of the enemy bg's have armored support or not and which squares they could. So it can be difficult knowing where the enemy armor is so you may misplace them at the wrong crosspoints or slopes for example.

[Mehl]

Originally posted by Major Ace:

Originally posted by Mehl:

fair enough, thats kind of the same case as far as i can tell?

as you point out you also know which "squares" the enemy tanks will be forced to deploy in, so you then tend to point your guns in the right direction and most suitable/effective locations right?

i do agree though, that the AI can be guilty of META placements of assets(88's, etc.) in locations they have no business being without having been spotted well ahead of the actual battle.
( i handicap myself in this way, by not deploying assets in locations they simply would never have been able to get into without the enemy seeing/firing on them)

Keep in mind you often don't know exactly which of the enemy bg's have armored support or not and which squares they could. So it can be difficult knowing where the enemy armor is so you may misplace them at the wrong crosspoints or slopes for example.

very true, *usually the AI tends to follow its historical game-plan and send it's armor where it's "supposed" to go, so you can get a slight advantage in the knowledge of the scenario you get going in.

i just try to remind myself in the times when things feel somewhat unfair/un-balanced, that it's supposed to be that way depending on what side your playing on any given scenario...

[Zephyr]

Originally posted by Major Ace:

Originally posted by Mehl:

fair enough, thats kind of the same case as far as i can tell?

as you point out you also know which "squares" the enemy tanks will be forced to deploy in, so you then tend to point your guns in the right direction and most suitable/effective locations right?

i do agree though, that the AI can be guilty of META placements of assets(88's, etc.) in locations they have no business being without having been spotted well ahead of the actual battle.
( i handicap myself in this way, by not deploying assets in locations they simply would never have been able to get into without the enemy seeing/firing on them)

Keep in mind you often don't know exactly which of the enemy bg's have armored support or not and which squares they could. So it can be difficult knowing where the enemy armor is so you may misplace them at the wrong crosspoints or slopes for example.

Well, all those issues the AI has also :). So why do you think it is cheating?

I (as a player) know always from what direction the enemy will come from, so my primary AT defense will point that way. It is not especially hard for a human to locate the "perfect" placement areas for AT guns in 1 km square. The AI is certainly not as good as a human there, but it also manages to do this well enough to counter tanks well when it has guns available.

What is so diificult or cheating about this? Just put your guns in the general direction of the enemy placement area :). That is all that is needed for a counter. The more sophisticated stuff comes later... . No idea how this is cheating. Every player does it and the AI often places guns in a forest ot somewhere else where they are of no use at all :). I have lost count of times I destroyed surprised enemy guns that were placed badly with tanks :).

I can place my units "undected" by the AI anywhere in the deployment areas. I can do whatever I see fit, regardless if it makes sense. The AI can do the same and uses patterns for the nodes to deploy on. Where is the cheating? I can place my units 100 m from the enemy zone "undetected"... . Really no idea what you mean.

This is by the way necessity by game design.

Maybe this is a language barrier, but Cheating means the AI is doing something the human player CANNOT do. Such things are virtually non-existent in GT games.

[Major Ace]

Originally posted by Zephyr:

Originally posted by Major Ace:

Keep in mind you often don't know exactly which of the enemy bg's have armored support or not and which squares they could. So it can be difficult knowing where the enemy armor is so you may misplace them at the wrong crosspoints or slopes for example.

Well, all those issues the AI has also :). So why do you think it is cheating?

I (as a player) know always from what direction the enemy will come from, so my primary AT defense will point that way. It is not especially hard for a human to locate the "perfect" placement areas for AT guns in 1 km square. The AI is certainly not as good as a human there, but it also manages to do this well enough to counter tanks well when it has guns available.

What is so diificult or cheating about this? Just put your guns in the general direction of the enemy placement area :). That is all that is needed for a counter. The more sophisticated stuff comes later... . No idea how this is cheating. Every player does it and the AI often places guns in a forest ot somewhere else where they are of no use at all :). I have lost count of times I destroyed surprised enemy guns that were placed badly with tanks :).

I can place my units "undected" by the AI anywhere in the deployment areas. I can do whatever I see fit, regardless if it makes sense. The AI can do the same and uses patterns for the nodes to deploy on. Where is the cheating? I can place my units 100 m from the enemy zone "undetected"... . Really no idea what you mean.

This is by the way necessity by game design.

Maybe this is a language barrier, but Cheating means the AI is doing something the human player CANNOT do. Such things are virtually non-existent in GT games.

Well the amount of times the ai deployed perfectly to counter my units is what proves that the ai cheats. Example from tank warfare tunisia which uses same ai, I had a map where right on the border there was a small slope down towards a little valley. I replayed the mission a lot of times by placing my tanks on the higher side of the valley, where each time the enemy ai placed at guns that were perfectly placed to counter my tanks. After a couple of restarts I decided to place them down in the valley and guess what? Now suddenly the at guns where placed down in the valley right in front of my tanks! The amount of areas I could deploy is a lot and yet the ai always placed the guns like if it sees where my tanks are. Yes some enemy ai units are placed badly I have noticed that but others are placed so well It is impossible without them physically knowing where my units are at all times.

Also about placing at guns, remember vegatation, terrain and the risk of enemy infantry has a lot to say. Many maps feature a lot of valleys, forest and elevation differences so you need to place at guns very well for them to be able to hit tanks, so even thought you know where the enemy tanks may be, you do not know their exact location so your forced to try and guess and position the at gun to your best ability. No map is fully flat with no obstacles. So even thought i know the enemy tank brigade is there they might have just moved their tanks to the other side of a valley or behind a slope which means my AT guns can't do too much. Also remember enemy infantry can sneak up to the guns at any point.

[Zephyr]

Originally posted by Major Ace:

Originally posted by Zephyr:

Well, all those issues the AI has also :). So why do you think it is cheating?

I (as a player) know always from what direction the enemy will come from, so my primary AT defense will point that way. It is not especially hard for a human to locate the "perfect" placement areas for AT guns in 1 km square. The AI is certainly not as good as a human there, but it also manages to do this well enough to counter tanks well when it has guns available.

What is so diificult or cheating about this? Just put your guns in the general direction of the enemy placement area :). That is all that is needed for a counter. The more sophisticated stuff comes later... . No idea how this is cheating. Every player does it and the AI often places guns in a forest ot somewhere else where they are of no use at all :). I have lost count of times I destroyed surprised enemy guns that were placed badly with tanks :).

I can place my units "undected" by the AI anywhere in the deployment areas. I can do whatever I see fit, regardless if it makes sense. The AI can do the same and uses patterns for the nodes to deploy on. Where is the cheating? I can place my units 100 m from the enemy zone "undetected"... . Really no idea what you mean.

This is by the way necessity by game design.

Maybe this is a language barrier, but Cheating means the AI is doing something the human player CANNOT do. Such things are virtually non-existent in GT games.

Well the amount of times the ai deployed perfectly to counter my units is what proves that the ai cheats. Example from tank warfare tunisia which uses same ai, I had a map where right on the border there was a small slope down towards a little valley. I replayed the mission a lot of times by placing my tanks on the higher side of the valley, where each time the enemy ai placed at guns that were perfectly placed to counter my tanks. After a couple of restarts I decided to place them down in the valley and guess what? Now suddenly the at guns where placed down in the valley right in front of my tanks! The amount of areas I could deploy is a lot and yet the ai always placed the guns like if it sees where my tanks are. Yes some enemy ai units are placed badly I have noticed that but others are placed so well It is impossible without them physically knowing where my units are at all times.

Also about placing at guns, remember vegatation, terrain and the risk of enemy infantry has a lot to say. Many maps feature a lot of valleys, forest and elevation differences so you need to place at guns very well for them to be able to hit tanks, so even thought you know where the enemy tanks may be, you do not know their exact location so your forced to try and guess and position the at gun to your best ability. No map is fully flat with no obstacles. So even thought i know the enemy tank brigade is there they might have just moved their tanks to the other side of a valley or behind a slope which means my AT guns can't do too much. Also remember enemy infantry can sneak up to the guns at any point.

Uhm,

I never, ever saw what you describe or would it call cheating just because my forces got hurt. The AI will vary how it deploys, it will never deploy exactly the same way. That is called "replay value" and "non-scripted AI".

If you want to convince anybody, that the AI cheats, do make a video, better more than one, please. Take care to show clear proof (or at least an approximation, like the example you mentioned, really clear proof is hard to do in this game) , because nobody here from the experienced players has seen or claimed anything like this (AI cheats on deployment) as far as I can remember.

Just writing this without any proof (just saying, it counters me perfectly is not proof, btw.) will not convince anybody. Everyone will just tell you that you are wrong.

Edit: You can also make a user mission out of the battle you mention or any similar one and share it so that everyone can test your specific example.

[Bulletpoint]

Do the new restricted deployment rules also affect the AI? In that case, it will be difficult for it to cheat, since its AT gun unit would be restricted to a small part of the setup zone.

[Zephyr]

I made a small video where I cannot see any issues, no strange reaction to different tank placements, lots of guns facing even away from the tanks. Could have done terrible damage to quite a few AT guns there without losing many tanks I think.

https://youtu.be/o4WN_I19XWM

[Zephyr]

Originally posted by Bulletpoint:

Do the new restricted deployment rules also affect the AI? In that case, it will be difficult for it to cheat, since its AT gun unit would be restricted to a small part of the setup zone.

Yes, it does affect the AI as well, that is why I have difficulty understanding OPs point without seeing a video or trying a shered user mission (so that all can test the same case). You always know now where the enemy is in general and pointing guns that way is not exactly hard :). Finding good spots (or the best possible) in such limited deployment areas is also not really rocket science... .

Even this the AI does not strictly do, as shown in my video above :).

[Major Ace]

Originally posted by Zephyr:

I made a small video where I cannot see any issues, no strange reaction to different tank placements, lots of guns facing even away from the tanks. Could have done terrible damage to quite a few AT guns there without losing many tanks I think.

https://youtu.be/o4WN_I19XWM

It seems to place them well only in campaign battles I have noticed, never in custom battles. I play mostly campaigns as well. My example was from a campaign I was playing and not custom battles.

[Major Ace]

Originally posted by Zephyr:

Originally posted by Bulletpoint:

Do the new restricted deployment rules also affect the AI? In that case, it will be difficult for it to cheat, since its AT gun unit would be restricted to a small part of the setup zone.

Yes, it does affect the AI as well, that is why I have difficulty understanding OPs point without seeing a video or trying a shered user mission (so that all can test the same case). You always know now where the enemy is in general and pointing guns that way is not exactly hard :). Finding good spots (or the best possible) in such limited deployment areas is also not really rocket science... .

Even this the AI does not strictly do, as shown in my video above :).

I don't have any AT gn restrictions as far as I know, or I have not noticed it. I can still deploy at guns at a area of about 2 grids