AI question

[ieyeasu]

indeed, assuming the values are weighted correctly, the ai would have perfect information and hence be able to make perfectly rational choices, and wax the average player.

Depends on what's deemed "rational".

I think what you'd do is set certain goals for the computer, the way a player does. A player builds a building because "Hey, I need to plan for my order situation when this city gets big" or "Hey, I want to build Janissary Musketeers here". So you set up those goals dependent on a myriad of factors: income, military situation, who your generals are, what faction you are, and go from there...

Excuse me while I wax vaguely on into the night...

[sapi]

I've said this before, but I think the major problem with the AI is not a lack of planning but an inability to plan.

A human, while saving to create, say, janissary musketeers, would put off other construction and recruitment tasks in order to raise sufficient money.

The AI always seems to find something to spend its cash on, and thus only lives from turn to turn.

[Foz]

I've said this before, but I think the major problem with the AI is not a lack of planning but an inability to plan.

A human, while saving to create, say, janissary musketeers, would put off other construction and recruitment tasks in order to raise sufficient money.

The AI always seems to find something to spend its cash on, and thus only lives from turn to turn.

I don't remember where I saw it, but I think there's a slider in the game somewhere that controls the AI's disposition toward spending vs. saving. It defaults to 100% spend. I haven't really played with it much, but it's entirely possible that its default position is what prevents the AI from ever having the cash it would need to make really great buildings or plan for the future. In fact I don't think I've ever heard ANYONE talk about that particular slider... so it should probably be something we try to tinker with extensively ASAP, since it's quite likely in my estimation that it will have a very noticeable impact on AI behavior. Whether that translates into better development and planning, or will just make the AI sit on piles of cash, though, is hard to say without trying it.

[Gaius Terentius Varro]

That's because the slider only works if you allow the AI to manage YOUR cities

[sapi]

Correct

It's in the faction management section of the UI

[nikolai1962]

It's not a bad idea, but imo it's not the right one for the devs to focus on.

I agree it's not what you want CA to be working on. As a modding technique to compensate for AI problems though, especially at game start, it works very well.

[HoreTore]

AI bonuses are the way to go to get a harder game IMO.

The AI can only match the human brain IN THEORY. For the very complex games of today, a perfected AI isn't an option in reality. In games like Red Alert 1, it could be perfected. In this game, it can, but it would take years to create such an AI. It just isn't an option.

Take another game, like Civ4, for example. It's extremely hard at the higher settings. Bump the difficulty up one level, and you'll lose even if you don't get a challenge at all at the level below. However, the AI as such isn't very different from the one in this game, although a little better. The reason the game is harder, is because of extreme AI bonuses. Sure, they send good attacks, but the reason they are good, is because they can afford huge armies because of their bonuses. If they didn't have those bonuses, the game would have been as easy as this game. It doesn't specialize, and it doesn't concentrate.

In this game, I would welcome AI battle bonuses. Give their units +30% or so attack and defense + a morale bonus, and you'll have your challenge.