RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory



Message

ravinhood -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 5:01:46 AM)

quote:

I think, atleast based upon the posts I've read in countless forums, people want to see an AI behave more intelligently


We've been asking for that for near 25 years now.

Granted that is so, but, in 25 years have we seen this accomplished? Therefore, since there is no improvement of "intelligence", the only other alternative for challenge is to play against "overwhelming odds or increased bonuses" as is what the majority of games on their most extreme difficulties give to us, been that way for 25 years now. So, since they aren't going to give us more intelligence, they should at least give us overwhelming odds that are challenging as well.

Each person as I said find challenge on an individual basis. After 25 years, my challenge level has risen and I require even more "overwhelming odds" in many games to enjoy them. "Normal" is like "ultra easy" for me in a matter of no time as well. Thus I don't get enjoyment out of the games if they don't have extreme difficulty levels with those "overwhelming odds". It's why I always start out playing on the highest difficulty.

I'd like a more intelligent AO that played with equal balance, but, it hasn't happened in 25 years and doesn't look to be going to happen for another 25 to 50 years, so, only the "odds" provide a challenge in them for me. Since you as well as I know the AI never learns or is going to improve the way it plays, it can be improved in how difficult it is in how much advantage it is given, and that is what I look for, since that is what I know to be true for 25 years up to present day. AO's have a one track mind, but, odds can be changed with a slider or player enhanced setting like CM/SPWAW.



jchastain -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 6:08:45 AM)

Can AI be perfect? Nope; not with today's technology and the budget available for a game anyway. Can it be better? Sure. I wouldn't call it outright bad, but I do think there are a few tweaks that would make CoG into a stronger opponent. Where those enhancements can be made with a reasonable amount of effort, I'd love to see them implemented. Like with most things that could be improved (and what couldn't be?), the key is in crossing that line between vague criticism and detailed constructive suggestions. [;)]



bluemonday -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 6:18:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jchastain

Like with most things that could be improved (and what couldn't be?), the key is in crossing that line between vague criticism and detailed constructive suggestions. [;)]

Agreed- and nice job on the suggestions for Detailed Combat AI.



ravinhood -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 6:44:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jchastain

Can AI be perfect? Nope; not with today's technology and the budget available for a game anyway. Can it be better? Sure. I wouldn't call it outright bad, but I do think there are a few tweaks that would make CoG into a stronger opponent. Where those enhancements can be made with a reasonable amount of effort, I'd love to see them implemented. Like with most things that could be improved (and what couldn't be?), the key is in crossing that line between vague criticism and detailed constructive suggestions. [;)]



After 25 years it's long past time for "constructive suggestions" it is more of a time for "vague criticisms". ;)



Cyrano -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 7:15:00 AM)

I find this all so predictable and strange.

If a challenging A.I., as it appears to have been defined here, is a sine qua non of purchasing a game, what are you guys playing?

TW series? Please.
CM series? Please also, let that A.I. TRY and attack.
BG/HPS? The less said here the better.
ANY RTS?

Don't misunderstand me, I LOVE aspects of TW, CM, BG and HPS series and have played them BLIND. I just think you're proposing a standard for CoG that, if made normative, would basically leave you gameless and angry.

Maybe it's just my motto now: If you want "I", play a human.

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)



jchastain -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 7:55:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cyrano
If a challenging A.I., as it appears to have been defined here, is a sine qua non of purchasing a game, what are you guys playing? ... Don't misunderstand me, I LOVE aspects of TW, CM, BG and HPS series and have played them BLIND. I just think you're proposing a standard for CoG that, if made normative, would basically leave you gameless and angry.


Actually, I've been trying to be abundantly clear throughout these discussions that I love this game; I find it to be refreshingly unique, perplexingly interesting, and a whole lot of fun. I started this thread merely because I was curious if my repeated winnings were a fluke, just the few nations/scenarios I was playing, or if it was a more universal phenomena. With a more complete understanding, I then went on to offer a few suggestions and hope others will as well. The intent was never to disparage the game, but rather to assess the situation and then propose a few suggestions for making a very good game even better.



TheHellPatrol -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 8:45:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zap

I said I was rethinking and reading but I lean in favor of the game. Every opinion counts for me. I just don't want it to be another game that sits in my no play pile. Your positive comments help.
The only other game that caused me to use so many brain cells to maintain a grand strategic focus and keep my head out of water is Witp. Witp is a little more complicated but the ai is easier to trick than COG...if you become too powerful they will gang up on you[;)].



TheHellPatrol -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 8:48:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zap

I said I was rethinking and reading but I lean in favor of the game. Every opinion counts for me. I just don't want it to be another game that sits in my no play pile. Your positive comments help.


You can win a few battles...but can you win a campaign? I have played quite a few campaigns through and i have seen nations glory skyrocket or plummet, including my own on both counts, so it's not over 'till it's over[:D].




2gaulle -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 2:52:49 PM)

If I'm always able to defeat the AI in detailed battle, even with the Turk at a difficult level it’s not the case at the Strategic level.
So now I only use Quick battle. Anyway, the game is as funny with Quick or detailed battle



strategy -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 4:04:48 PM)

quote:

Don't misunderstand me, I LOVE aspects of TW, CM, BG and HPS series and have played them BLIND. I just think you're proposing a standard for CoG that, if made normative, would basically leave you gameless and angry.

Maybe it's just my motto now: If you want "I", play a human.


Or try to build it yourself (which is my philosophy). [;)]



donkuchi19 -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 4:57:10 PM)

I have played several standard campaigns. While I did win the vast majority of tactical battles, I have yet to win a full campaign. (I have played as Russia, Prussia, and Austria full campaigns and started some as France and England) The A.I. is challenging enough at the strategic level to make up for any perceived deficiency at the tactical level.



Reg Pither -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 6:00:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: donkuchi
The A.I. is challenging enough at the strategic level to make up for any perceived deficiency at the tactical level.


I think that sums it up nicely, and will be good enough for me for some time. [:)]



dpazuk -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 7:19:10 PM)

I just want to second that the A.I. is definately great at the strategic level. Again, this is just playing on 'Normal' difficulty.

My situation:

Playing as England (Sorry..forgot to mention that part!) for my second game, I set the game to run for 15 years and the first with 5000 glory.
(big mistake).

Well, I was the first to reach 1000 (of course, I could have won, had I set the glory to 1000..lol).

When France surrendered, Turkey set up a 'secret' treaty , whereby they allied with Prussia and France and instructed them to declare war on me!

At least I assume it was 'secret' in that there was an '*' next to the title of the treaty.

Sneaky bastages! My allies abandonded me (Russia, Sweden and Austria) and now I am completely alone and unprepared!

I can't defend everywhere. Without any allies, I think I am toast!

So to sum up, the strategic A.I. sure does go for the jugular!



sol_invictus -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 7:25:13 PM)

I haven't done it yet but from reading comments about people winning early or somewhat easily, I thought that an easy solution might be to increase the required Glory needed for victory. It would give the AI more time to counter a human that is on the path to victory. I also wonder what Nations some of these wins are taking place with and at what difficulty level. I certainly expect France, England, and maybe Russia to be fairly easy wins but this would hardly be a knock against the AI. A human should have an easy time with these military behemoths.



dpazuk -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 7:36:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arinvald

I haven't done it yet but from reading comments about people winning early or somewhat easily, I thought that an easy solution might be to increase the required Glory needed for victory. It would give the AI more time to counter a human that is on the path to victory. I also wonder what Nations some of these wins are taking place with and at what difficulty level. I certainly expect France, England, and maybe Russia to be fairly easy wins but this would hardly be a knock against the AI. A human should have an easy time with these military behemoths.


Well, I set the conditions for winning the game myself. You can do this easily at the beginning of the game.

Mind you, it could have went the other way. In my first game, France took out each of my allies one by one and their glory was well over 1000 higher then mine for the remainder of the game.

It's a crap shoot!



Naomi -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 10:04:28 PM)

Caution against quick battles. I used quick resolution quite often to find that AI helped you lose as many battles as you won, even if you had everything superior.



Reiryc -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 11:08:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Naomi

Caution against quick battles. I used quick resolution quite often to find that AI helped you lose as many battles as you won, even if you had everything superior.


I find that I still win the majority of those battles as well. You have to make sure your units are in supply and put in good places on the 'battle board' however.

Right click on your and your opponents units to see what bonuses they may have.



Naomi -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/4/2005 11:18:14 PM)

Forgot to add: I let AI handle placing the chits.



wodin -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/5/2005 2:10:50 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: 2gaulle

If I'm always able to defeat the AI in detailed battle, even with the Turk at a difficult level it’s not the case at the Strategic level.
So now I only use Quick battle. Anyway, the game is as funny with Quick or detailed battle



After your posts pre release iits good to see your enjoying the game.

I'd never have thought it.[;)]



Zap -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/5/2005 2:24:45 AM)

quote:

I have played quite a few campaigns through and i have seen nations glory skyrocket or plummet, including my own on both counts, so it's not over 'till it's over


Now those are sweet words for my eyes to read. Thats what I'm talking about!!!!!!![sm=00000280.gif] The factor of suspense till the end, despite an alleged weak A.I. Thaks everyone for your assessment.



Zap -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/5/2005 2:14:35 PM)

I noticed in game description Complexity Level is Intermidiate. WaW had the same level, that game did not meet my needs for complexity. Will CoG? Many speak about how it is will I be disappointed?



Erik Rutins -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/5/2005 4:12:46 PM)

It was tough to decide on the final complexity level. Using all the advisors may actually make it easier than intermediate, but with all advisors off it is more complex than Intermediate. I don't think any wargamer will be disappointed if they are looking for enough strategic and tactical depth. This game has that and fortunately allows gamers who want a bit less to also tune it to their desires.



ravinhood -> RE: Beta Testers: Winning % ? (7/5/2005 7:16:43 PM)

That sounds good Erik that you put a lot of the difficulty settings into the players hands. That's what more games need.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.109375