The AI is still better than no player at all. And disconnects can happen. The sensible thing would be to have an AI jump in but still allow reconnects.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
In competitive game ?Hell no.In 10 vs 10s where players drop like flys i see it as decent solution but in a 3vs3,4vs4 Ranked/Tournaments games it would be a dissaster imho.
In W:RD cash to win tourney we played "losers bracket final" games and in the first game i dropped and my teammates Firestarter and Razzmann won 2vs3,i am pretty sure we would have lost if i was replaced by the AI.Its just an example but i am pretty sure all the teams that are playing Tourneys or Ranked would rather play without the AI filling the holes.
Last edited:
True, when you lose a player you indeed lose a player and the replacing AI can be really stupid. Sure, it may plug the hole in your front in some way but most often it does dumb things, clustering troops, suicidal things etc. The front where the AI is turns into easy mode. This said the situation in a competitive game was also pretty serious when a player dropped when it didn't get replaced by AI, and could often result in a quit since the front was suddenly a lot harder to handle. So damned if you do and damned if you don't, but ultimately handing it over to the AI does remove control from the players, and that's generally a bad thing.
What I still don't understand is why they decided to replace the dropped player with an AI and not just distribute the forces on the field to the nearest players, you know, see who owns the nearest unit next to the dropping player's unit and then gift it to that player, repeat for all units. That would have been the logical way of handling it, instead of giving all the units to one player, which could completely disorient that player.
