|
TheElf -> RE: Very confused (10/17/2009 6:10:05 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: pad152
quote:
ORIGINAL: Andy Mac
Guys I am in a bit of a quandry now - I am forming the opinion that I cannot please anyone on this stuff.
I never played the WITP AI I am a PBEM er through and through but for my sins I was assigned the Ai task on AE.
I researched it and the number 1 complaint was that the Ai didnt give you a good game, it was to easy, it was moronic, it was passive, it never suprised you etc etc
Every thread I went through on the old WITP forum - and there weren't many of them that are that recent because most AI players couldnt play mods or had got fed up of the Ai basically said make it better make it harder let it give us a game.
So thats the goal and target we set ourselves - we promised no worse than stock but defacto tried to make it better.
I am now at a loss what to do. The AI will give you a more enjoyable game I am convinced of that but yes it does get some help - some of it is EXACTLY as it was in stock make no mistake the AI cheated there as well - some of it was added because we identified what the stock AI was bad at and if we couldnt help it out legitimately tried to help it out in other ways.
I am sorry folks are dissapointed but what exactly do you want ? A game that can challenge and excite you without an AI that has some help ? No game that I am aware of can do that especially not one as complex as this
After patch 2 I think I need a break I am going to play some PBEM and enjoy the game and stop reading these kinds of threads because I simply don't get it - I apologise to everyone that doesnt like what the Ai is or how it operates but I have no idea what to say any more
Taking a break sounds like a good idea, go have some fun![:)]
I think there are three issues here:
1. The AI not playing by the same rules as the player.
2. The AI doing things (invading places even a player would have a hard time doing), some view this as gamy or non-historical. Some are never going to like the non-historical moves.
3. (Non-AI Issue) The player is much limited than in WITP, in what they can do, a lot of restricted commands, static units, high garrison requirements make the player feel like their hands are tied. The allied player starts off with 65-70%? of forces on the map they can't do much with because of these restrictions.
What I would like to see, to address these issues.
1. An AI that looks like it's playing by the same rules as the player (no more 4 engine bombers flying from level 1 or 2 bases, etc.) Teleporting AI task forces, add some random delay so the player doesn't see a ship/TF on one place on the map and than half way across the map on the next turn. I don't mind the AI getting bonuses just having it look like it's playing by the same rules as the player. Limit the load outs for carrier strikes, sometimes it seems AI carrier groups can bomb a location for weeks, (hitting Pearl Harbor of 14 days straight) These are the biggest issues I have with the AI.
2. Sometime after patch2, some discussions/help/how too's in player designed AI scripting (example: how to get the AI to invade
Midway, and/or the Aleutians during a campaign and how to get the AI to defend (respond to an invasion of x base.). This way players can develop more historic and/or non-historic AI scripts over time.
3. I want an AI that is some what random and dynamic, one that doesn't always do the same thing (big issue with WITP, the AI was so scripted it always did the same thing, at the same point in each campaign). Your idea of multiple scripts randomly selected at the start of a new campaign sounds like it will fit the bill. Maybe a AI script depo/library and how to randomly select scripts.
4. Some How to's with the editor on removing some of these restrictions,(reducing restricted commands, # of static units, high garrison levels, etc.) let the players play the way they want. I hope we get a AE version of Witpchk, for checking player made scenarios/campaigns.
Andy Mac is at a disadvantage. AE is probably the only game where nosy AI players can look behind the curtain and "cheat" themselves twice. First they cheat by looking at the AI and seeing what it is doing, then they cheat themselves out of a blissfully ignorant AI experience when they realize that the AI REALLY needs a LOT of help.
If you looked behind the curtain, you deserve to be disappointed, much like the person who reads internet spoilers about a summer blockbuster and then complains that the movie was predictable....[8|]
|
|
|
|
