Very disappointed

Very disappointed (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition

Message

Chickenboy -> Very disappointed (10/8/2009 4:19:05 PM)
ETA: This thread was started after my first attempt vs. the IJ AI in 2009. Some of the AI scripts have changed, but I still harken back to the discussion for newcomers. It's still useful for them to hear the back and forth re: AI "cheats" and the benefits of AI v. PBEM. That's why I'm bumping it again. ETA II: My apologies to Andy Mac especially. Much of the tone here is quite critical of the AI (at least from my part). His selfless work on the AI has lead to immeasurable improvements, by all accounts. This may not be apparent from much of my postings on this thread. After playing against the IJ AI since the game's release (I patched a couple weeks ago), I felt gradual creeping dread settling over my game. No, not due to forcible evictions of my digital troops from Manila, Singapore and the like-but a sense like other posters that something was amiss on the IJ AI side of things. So I took a look. I feel like someone that has been suspicious of their wife's activities and opens up her email to do a little fact finding. Only to discover that she was having affairs. Lots of them. With a whole football team. During a game. Which was televised. It just gets worse and worse the more you look into it. Here's what I found: (currently in March 20, 1942. Was playing on very hard until recently, when I scaled back to 'historical' in an effort to stem some cheating that was likely occuring under the 'very hard' settings. How'd that work out for me?) 1. The Manchuko Garrison is at 6570/8000 required. The Soviets should have activated. Where are those Manchuko troops? One of the divisions landed on the Northern tip of New Caledonia a month or so ago. I don't know where the other 1000+ AV are. In recently captured Rangoon, the IJ have completely evacuated the city, busy chasing my soldiers into North Burma. Not one IJ unit is present, certainly not enough to garrison the city properly. I received partisan activity warnings while replaying the turn. Looks like the IJ isn't bound by any sort of PP, garrison or operational HQ area boundaries. Is this WAD? 2. I've been getting large numbers of air attacks from Singapore since the IJ took it. Makes sense. Except, even though there's 185 a/c there, there's not ONE aviation support point in the city. Very few planes in repair or maintenance status. Similarly, looks at other air units across the map revealed very few units with any planes in repair or maintenance status. All A6M2 Daitai, for example, were fully manned, planed and ready for action. Looks like the IJ isn't bound by aviation support, aircraft maintenance or repair requirements. Is this WAD? 3. A IJN TF just unloaded an SNLF unit in its entirety onto Tassafaronga last turn to capture it. OK. That happened IRL, no biggie. Except the TF was set to "Transport" rather than amphibious. And Tassafaronga is a 0(0) port size. And the unit was not at all disrupted by this miraculous landing. Looks like the IJ isn't bound by TF composition, load / unload requirements, port sizes or amphibious disruption during unload. I can't imagine that this can be explained away with the early war amphibious alone, can it? Is this WAD? 4. The IJ airforces have lost a huge number of airframes and, presumably, pilots to date. Yet, the available pilot pool for the IJN was 1104. IJA 1935. I've read board proclamations that the available airframes 'boost' that the AI gets was not the problem, but that pilot availability would be the bottleneck for the IJ AI. Looks like that won't be an issue for some time and the IJ gets 'free' pilots (nearly) ad libitum as well. Is this WAD? 5. The existing A6M2 available pool was 1742 with a build rate of 312. The Betty pool was 744 with a build rate of 200. Looks like other posters were dead on about this. Apparently, the AI isn't bound by production parameters for aircraft frames. I've heard from some folks on other threads that this is not working as designed and will be 'scaled back' for patch II. Great news! To further my previous analogy, my wife in my example will no longer be carrying on her salacious behavior with the defensive secondary, although she's not making any promises about desisting with the offensive line. 6. After four months of bitter warfare, the Japanese home islands appear to have massive stores of supplies / oil / resources / fuel. As examples: Osaka: 999,999 / 997,229 / 887,164 / 432,793 Tokyo: 980,044 / 998,049 / 848,183 / 389,644 Other cities have resources in excess of 999,000 as well. Is this WAD? Looks like the IJ won't really be needing Palembang, Balikpapan, Java or Tarakan for some time for fuel or oil. I can't imagine a need in the next 3-4 years for resources either. Why should it bother with capturing these areas? So, to summarize: The AI appears to be unbounded by: political points and HQ restrictions; garrison requirements; home island supply, oil, resources, production of / pools of airframes, pilots; TF load/unload limitations, assignments for load / unload; airframe maintenance and repair timeframes. These in addition to the reported and documented 'script' errors. These oversights / omissions / errors / hackneyed 'bonuses' make the game virtually unplayable versus the AI now. All the clever AI gambits and scripts in the world won't change the overwhelming crush of otherworldly production issues that are going on within my game. I'm just waiting for the Imperial Twin Ion Engine (TIE) fighter production to start for the IJ. You know, 1000 a month-just to make it tough for the human player. That and transporting troops through the IJ Stargate. These ideas make just about as much sense as some of these cheats here, if they're WAD. For those of you that are out there 'contentedly' playing against the AI: It's a sham marriage, folks. Check it out for yourselves. No clever manuevers will save you from the AI. It will go where it wants to, when it wants to and no rules of the game (or physics) will get in the way. If you consider this a challenge, trying to outwit nonsensical production and replacements, more power to you. I for one have better things to do with my time. So, back to my wife analogy. I'll ask that she desist and correct the error of her ways (patch II). But with so much and such flagrant cheating going on, it seems unlikely that all will be corrected-leaving me heart broken. [:(]

Mynok -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 4:26:29 PM)
Try PBEM. [8D]

Chickenboy -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 4:27:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Try PBEM. [8D] Looks like that's the only way the game is playable, Mynok.[:-]

treespider -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 4:31:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Try PBEM. [8D] Looks like that's the only way the game is playable, Mynok.[:-] Well you did say you were playing 'Very Hard'...[;)]

Mynok -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 4:32:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Try PBEM. [8D] Looks like that's the only way the game is playable, Mynok.[:-] I've been saying that for years. [;)]

Chickenboy -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 4:39:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Try PBEM. [8D] Looks like that's the only way the game is playable, Mynok.[:-] I've been saying that for years. [;)] Yes, and only now do I agree with you. [;)] Most people that buy this game probably don't regularly PBEM or visit the forums. This has really got to irk that 'silent majority' something fierce.

Canoerebel -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 5:16:22 PM)
As we all know, this is an incredbily complex game. I doubt there's any way to really program an AI to handle something this complex and fluid. PBEM is the only answer. Even if my opponent disappeared, I'd rather play a month of thrilling PBEM than years of gaming against the AI.

Shark7 -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 5:21:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Try PBEM. [8D] Looks like that's the only way the game is playable, Mynok.[:-] I've been saying that for years. [;)] I'm actually surprised that your army of little green men hasn't over-run everything yet. [:D] PBEM against a good opponant is the absolute best way to play. AI is good for wasting time when you've nothing better to do.

Matto -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 5:27:21 PM)
Problem is, that in PBEM are allied little bit boosted ... I�m playing two campaigns from both sides, both only in December 41 and in both are Japanese in troubles ... it is not easy attack like in old WitP. I cannot imagine, how it will look at 1943 ...

Kereguelen -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 5:49:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Matto Problem is, that in PBEM are allied little bit boosted ... I�m playing two campaigns from both sides, both only in December 41 and in both are Japanese in troubles ... it is not easy attack like in old WitP. I cannot imagine, how it will look at 1943 ... Where did you get this[&:]? The Allied side was not boosted in (or for) PBEM games.

Mynok -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 5:56:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Try PBEM. [8D] Looks like that's the only way the game is playable, Mynok.[:-] I've been saying that for years. [;)] Yes, and only now do I agree with you. [;)] Most people that buy this game probably don't regularly PBEM or visit the forums. This has really got to irk that 'silent majority' something fierce. Some of them aren't silent, I assure you! I've locked horns with them on numerous occasions. [:D] The AI is for training. It will never be as satisfying as a human opponent. PBEM is not difficult to do. In fact, I have a little Guadalcanal scenario going right now that might take me fifteen minutes to do a turn. Some of those complaining about not having time to do PBEM spend more time than that writing their complaint post. [8\|] Give it a shot! You'll like it.

pad152 -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 6:10:32 PM)
There are only two types of game AI, those that cheat and the ones you don't notice cheating. In AE, the AI only has two limitations, (troops, ships) if you destroy a ship, or land unit (LCU) they don't come back. Not sure about AI Air groups they always seem to just fly away if a base is captured. So the player's job is to destroy ships, cutoff and destroy LCU's while capturing objectives. I think the biggest issue with the AI, it's too easy even without peeking, to notice it's not playing by the same rules as the player (ships teleporting across the map, 4 engine aircraft flying for level 1 or 2 airfields, etc.). The AI's forces always showing up at the right place at the right time, all while tying the players hands with static and restricted commands, high garrison requirements and load/unload rules that would give UPS/Fed-X a headache. Suggestions: - Make the AI follow more of the rules, aircraft type vs. base size. - Make the AI take a little more time to load/unload. - Add a little more randomness or random delay to the AI actions, so it doesn't always do the same thing, making it appear is not cheating. - Ability to get a list of destroyed ground units (both Allied & Japan) just like ships. - Ability to get a list of destroyed air units (both Allied & Japan) just like ships. - List of bases captured by date, so the player can see how they are doing vs. history. Sorry but, some of us didn't buy a PBEM only game.

Chickenboy -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 6:12:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok Try PBEM. [8D] Looks like that's the only way the game is playable, Mynok.[:-] I've been saying that for years. [;)] Yes, and only now do I agree with you. [;)] Most people that buy this game probably don't regularly PBEM or visit the forums. This has really got to irk that 'silent majority' something fierce. Some of them aren't silent, I assure you! I've locked horns with them on numerous occasions. [:D] The AI is for training. It will never be as satisfying as a human opponent. PBEM is not difficult to do. In fact, I have a little Guadalcanal scenario going right now that might take me fifteen minutes to do a turn. Some of those complaining about not having time to do PBEM spend more time than that writing their complaint post. [8\|] Give it a shot! You'll like it. I've done PBEM for the Coral Sea scenario. Fun. You're right Mr. Martian-I do like green eggs and ham! But this discussion isn't really about which is better (PBEM vs. AI). To continue my 'marriage' analogy from my original post, it would be akin to telling your cuckolded friend that 'marriage sucks anyways so stay single' instead of trying to help his marriage work. May be true, but not helpful in resolution of the underlying problem. So, to continue the analogy: this marriage sucks. I want a divorce! I've responded to Crimguy for a GC PBEM.

Andy Mac -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 6:15:22 PM)
I am sorry thats how you feel Chickenboy. 1. The AI does ignore Manchurian garrison requirements - in stock they added a huge number of extra units to help the AI recycling of units especially on the Japanese side - without access to those units I needed forces to beef up AI invasions so I used Manchurian forces. 2. The AI is not immune to aviation support requirements on normal difficulty. 3. If the unit was fully prepped and during the japanese amphib bonus stage thats not impossible for a unit to be mostly undisrupted for either a player or the AI. 4. AI does not get free pilots most of those will be poorly trained - one of the issues is that the AI does run out of trained pilots quickly and the quality tanks 5. As was said by James in answer on the other thread there is a logic problem with the AI on upgrades which we are correcting for patch 2. In addition we are toning down any production help the AI gets on normal difficulty BUT if you played the game on very hard then the AI doesnt just lose the accumulated benefits it gets when you switch back to normal. If you play 3 months on VHArd the AI WILL have big pools of some types probably they will eventually dissapear over time but 1 month is not long enough. 6. AI does not get free resources etc in the HI and uses the same factory logic as players nor does it get massive bonuses even on hard resources are now used in lots of 20 so you will get big stores of them. quote: ORIGINAL: Chickenboy After playing against the IJ AI since the game's release (I patched a couple weeks ago), I felt gradual creeping dread settling over my game. No, not due to forcible evictions of my digital troops from Manila, Singapore and the like-but a sense like other posters that something was amiss on the IJ AI side of things. So I took a look. I feel like someone that has been suspicious of their wife's activities and opens up her email to do a little fact finding. Only to discover that she was having affairs. Lots of them. With a whole football team. During a game. Which was televised. It just gets worse and worse the more you look into it. Here's what I found: (currently in March 20, 1942. Was playing on very hard until recently, when I scaled back to 'historical' in an effort to stem some cheating that was likely occuring under the 'very hard' settings. How'd that work out for me?) 1. The Manchuko Garrison is at 6570/8000 required. The Soviets should have activated. Where are those Manchuko troops? One of the divisions landed on the Northern tip of New Caledonia a month or so ago. I don't know where the other 1000+ AV are. In recently captured Rangoon, the IJ have completely evacuated the city, busy chasing my soldiers into North Burma. Not one IJ unit is present, certainly not enough to garrison the city properly. I received partisan activity warnings while replaying the turn. Looks like the IJ isn't bound by any sort of PP, garrison or operational HQ area boundaries. Is this WAD? 2. I've been getting large numbers of air attacks from Singapore since the IJ took it. Makes sense. Except, even though there's 185 a/c there, there's not ONE aviation support point in the city. Very few planes in repair or maintenance status. Similarly, looks at other air units across the map revealed very few units with any planes in repair or maintenance status. All A6M2 Daitai, for example, were fully manned, planed and ready for action. Looks like the IJ isn't bound by aviation support, aircraft maintenance or repair requirements. Is this WAD? 3. A IJN TF just unloaded an SNLF unit in its entirety onto Tassafaronga last turn to capture it. OK. That happened IRL, no biggie. Except the TF was set to "Transport" rather than amphibious. And Tassafaronga is a 0(0) port size. And the unit was not at all disrupted by this miraculous landing. Looks like the IJ isn't bound by TF composition, load / unload requirements, port sizes or amphibious disruption during unload. I can't imagine that this can be explained away with the early war amphibious alone, can it? Is this WAD? 4. The IJ airforces have lost a huge number of airframes and, presumably, pilots to date. Yet, the available pilot pool for the IJN was 1104. IJA 1935. I've read board proclamations that the available airframes 'boost' that the AI gets was not the problem, but that pilot availability would be the bottleneck for the IJ AI. Looks like that won't be an issue for some time and the IJ gets 'free' pilots (nearly) ad libitum as well. Is this WAD? 5. The existing A6M2 available pool was 1742 with a build rate of 312. The Betty pool was 744 with a build rate of 200. Looks like other posters were dead on about this. Apparently, the AI isn't bound by production parameters for aircraft frames. I've heard from some folks on other threads that this is not working as designed and will be 'scaled back' for patch II. Great news! To further my previous analogy, my wife in my example will no longer be carrying on her salacious behavior with the defensive secondary, although she's not making any promises about desisting with the offensive line. 6. After four months of bitter warfare, the Japanese home islands appear to have massive stores of supplies / oil / resources / fuel. As examples: Osaka: 999,999 / 997,229 / 887,164 / 432,793 Tokyo: 980,044 / 998,049 / 848,183 / 389,644 Other cities have resources in excess of 999,000 as well. Is this WAD? Looks like the IJ won't really be needing Palembang, Balikpapan, Java or Tarakan for some time for fuel or oil. I can't imagine a need in the next 3-4 years for resources either. Why should it bother with capturing these areas? So, to summarize: The AI appears to be unbounded by: political points and HQ restrictions; garrison requirements; home island supply, oil, resources, production of / pools of airframes, pilots; TF load/unload limitations, assignments for load / unload; airframe maintenance and repair timeframes. These in addition to the reported and documented 'script' errors. These oversights / omissions / errors / hackneyed 'bonuses' make the game virtually unplayable versus the AI now. All the clever AI gambits and scripts in the world won't change the overwhelming crush of otherworldly production issues that are going on within my game. I'm just waiting for the Imperial Twin Ion Engine (TIE) fighter production to start for the IJ. You know, 1000 a month-just to make it tough for the human player. That and transporting troops through the IJ Stargate. These ideas make just about as much sense as some of these cheats here, if they're WAD. For those of you that are out there 'contentedly' playing against the AI: It's a sham marriage, folks. Check it out for yourselves. No clever manuevers will save you from the AI. It will go where it wants to, when it wants to and no rules of the game (or physics) will get in the way. If you consider this a challenge, trying to outwit nonsensical production and replacements, more power to you. I for one have better things to do with my time. So, back to my wife analogy. I'll ask that she desist and correct the error of her ways (patch II). But with so much and such flagrant cheating going on, it seems unlikely that all will be corrected-leaving me heart broken. [:(]

Andy Mac -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 6:17:17 PM)
p.s. after the Japanese amphib bonus ends the AI struggles the same as players at amphib operations

Charbroiled -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 6:24:31 PM)
Don't look at it like the "wife" has been cheating on you....look at it as if the "wife" has been on the internet and has learned to make "short-cuts" in order to please you more. You would probably be completely happy with the joy from the things "she" does in order to please you more, but once you look at the books she is has been reading, you would probably be disgusted at the "raunchy" material she has been reading. The AE "wife" is much more pleasurable then the WITP "wife" who just laid there and didn't do much.

Chickenboy -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 6:25:41 PM)
Andy Mac, I appreciate all you've done for the AI scripts. I've heard nothing but solid reviews on the rework. Thank you for your meaningful and thoughtful response above. I'll weigh restarting vs. the AI after patch II on historical mode.

Chickenboy -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 6:26:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Charbroiled The AE "wife" is much more pleasurable then the WITP "wife" who just laid there and didn't do much. [:D]

Mike Scholl -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 6:32:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kereguelen quote: ORIGINAL: Matto Problem is, that in PBEM are allied little bit boosted ... I�m playing two campaigns from both sides, both only in December 41 and in both are Japanese in troubles ... it is not easy attack like in old WitP. I cannot imagine, how it will look at 1943 ... Where did you get this[&:]? The Allied side was not boosted in (or for) PBEM games. I think he's dealing with an Allied player who's making better use of "hindsight" than he is. The Japanese do need to operate on a "shoestring" early on, and an Allied player who pushes everything to the max can tie some nasty knots in it. Probably more a need for discussion and some houserules/gentlemen's agreements than a major re-write.

pad152 -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 6:41:33 PM)
quote: Andy Mac 6. AI does not get free resources etc in the HI and uses the same factory logic as players nor does it get massive bonuses even on hard resources are now used in lots of 20 so you will get big stores of them. Really? the AI is forced to move 30,000 resources per day in campaign 2?

pmelheck1 -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 6:42:46 PM)
For some of us the issue of PBEM has nothing to do with time. I don't care how long or short PBEM is. If turns took 15 seconds I DON'T CARE. I just don't like two player games and I never will. I NEVER buy any game that is two player only. I am so disgusted with 2 player games I will quit computers before returning to them. I do believe Matrix will get the AI working better at some point. If I didn't think they can fix the AI I wouldn't be here and wouldn't buy anymore games from matrix if they can't program an AI. AE is a very complex game requiring a very complex AI and from my experience with Matrix they will correct the AI. But for some of us PBEM is not an issue for AI issues.

Admiral Scott -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 6:47:53 PM)
Maybe playing on normal difficulty is the way to go. How good of a game does the AI give you on normal?

Chad Harrison -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 7:03:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Admiral Scott Maybe playing on normal difficulty is the way to go. How good of a game does the AI give you on normal? I am and have been playing against the AI on normal since the first real patch (I started it after the patch). I was bored to tears with the AI in vanilla WitP - no matter the setting. It was a tough challenege your first or second time through, but after that, it was easy to defeat. Heres your checklist to beating the AI in vanilla WitP: 1. Move all troops in Malaya to Singapore. 2. Move all troops in Luzon to Manila. 3. Move all troops in DEI to Soerbaja. 4. Move all troops in Burma to Rangoon. Send all Commonwealth reinforcements to Rangoon. There, you just beat the AI in vanilla WitP! All four of those places will now never fall, and the AI falls apart very, very quickly after that. Now welcome to AE. I wanted to see what the dev team had done with the AI, so I did the exact above in AE. My game is now to April 15th, 1942. Manila has fallen. Singapore has fallend. The DEI has fallen. I still hold Rangoon, but there are some big meanies coming down the road. And this is all on 'normal'. Yes, the AI gets some advantages over the human player. The goal of the dev team was to make a challenging AI. They have done so. Yes, they have given the AI some bonus' to different things - some of which were in vanilla WitP - some of which were not. But that ensures that the AI will remain challenging much, much longer than it did in vanilla WitP. Does that mean there is no room for improvement? No, ofcourse not. Threads like these help shed light to the dev team about how the AI working.

Puhis -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 7:30:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Admiral Scott Maybe playing on normal difficulty is the way to go. How good of a game does the AI give you on normal? I'm playing normal game as Japan. Only one month now, but so far very challenging game in China. I was too optimistic and tried to advance right away, so chinese quickly took 4 cities. Now I have to re-direct my troops to get those cities back... Very fun! Other parts of the map no major problems so far, but it's still early game. Well, Burma invasion stopped too... I'm not experience player, but I think this AI is huge improvement compared to vanilla.

Mynok -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 7:59:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mullk For some of us the issue of PBEM has nothing to do with time.� I don't care how long or short PBEM is.� If turns took 15 seconds I DON'T CARE.� I just don't like two player games and I never will.� I NEVER buy any game that is two player only.� I am so disgusted with 2 player games I will quit computers before returning to them.� I do believe Matrix will get the AI working better at some point.� If I didn't think they can fix the AI I wouldn't be here and wouldn't buy anymore games from matrix if they can't program an AI.� AE is a very complex game requiring a very complex AI and from my experience with Matrix they will correct the AI.� But for some of us PBEM is not an issue for AI issues. [&:] How can you possibly project some mythical "2 player game" experience onto every game? Every game is very different. Some do better as AI games and others as 2 player games. THIS is a 2 player game at its core. I'm just sorry for your sake that you are too stubborn to even give it a try. Have fun how you wish, but it is your loss.

mjk428 -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 8:13:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok quote: ORIGINAL: mullk For some of us the issue of PBEM has nothing to do with time.� I don't care how long or short PBEM is.� If turns took 15 seconds I DON'T CARE.� I just don't like two player games and I never will.� I NEVER buy any game that is two player only.� I am so disgusted with 2 player games I will quit computers before returning to them.� I do believe Matrix will get the AI working better at some point.� If I didn't think they can fix the AI I wouldn't be here and wouldn't buy anymore games from matrix if they can't program an AI.� AE is a very complex game requiring a very complex AI and from my experience with Matrix they will correct the AI.� But for some of us PBEM is not an issue for AI issues. [&:] How can you possibly project some mythical "2 player game" experience onto every game? Every game is very different. Some do better as AI games and others as 2 player games. THIS is a 2 player game at its core. I'm just sorry for your sake that you are too stubborn to even give it a try. Have fun how you wish, but it is your loss. Matrix sells this game as being able to play against the AI. You like PBEM, that's great. Some people don't, that's great too. Stop insulting other people's preferences just because they differ from yours.

Mynok -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 8:15:54 PM)
See Chickenboy? Out from the woodwork they come just as soon as someone encourages anyone to try PBEM. [8\|]

mjk428 -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 8:19:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok See Chickenboy? Out from the woodwork they come just as soon as someone encourages anyone to try PBEM. [8\|] quote: I'm just sorry for your sake that you are too stubborn to even give it a try. Have fun how you wish, but it is your loss. You call that "encouraging"?

Buck Beach -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 8:23:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mynok quote: ORIGINAL: mullk For some of us the issue of PBEM has nothing to do with time.� I don't care how long or short PBEM is.� If turns took 15 seconds I DON'T CARE.� I just don't like two player games and I never will.� I NEVER buy any game that is two player only.� I am so disgusted with 2 player games I will quit computers before returning to them.� I do believe Matrix will get the AI working better at some point.� If I didn't think they can fix the AI I wouldn't be here and wouldn't buy anymore games from matrix if they can't program an AI.� AE is a very complex game requiring a very complex AI and from my experience with Matrix they will correct the AI.� But for some of us PBEM is not an issue for AI issues. [&:] How can you possibly project some mythical "2 player game" experience onto every game? Every game is very different. Some do better as AI games and others as 2 player games. THIS is a 2 player game at its core. I'm just sorry for your sake that you are too stubborn to even give it a try. Have fun how you wish, but it is your loss. Yes, we get it Mynok!! If fact we get it over and over and over again. Why don't you just stop with your rhetoric. Nothing you say about the virtues of a PBEM game can be thought of as a religious revelation. El Cid was preaching this as has everyone else for years about WITP and now WITP-AE, what a surprise PBEM is better that solo play. Do you think that your not going to get into heaven unless you succeed in your life's mission to convert the masses? Rant over but really Jeez Louise!

ChickenOfTheSea -> RE: Very disappointed (10/8/2009 8:40:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Admiral Scott Maybe playing on normal difficulty is the way to go. How good of a game does the AI give you on normal? In my current game, I decided to go with the Ironman mod on normal. The AI side gets some non-historical material help rather than rampant cheating. PBEM is a much more fun way to play, but I don't think I am quite ready for that in AE yet. I haven't had time to get the mechanics down. I will probably wait for patch II before starting a PBEM.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.671875