Tired of fighting the cheating ai. Every time I tag to a mighty ai empire I see the ai enjoying a HUGE army without the risk of bankrupting. It's really annoooooooying, and I don't think it is helpful to enhance mr human's gaming experience.
-
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.
He presumably wants better AI capable of dealing with all the limitations the player faces.
The one thing I really don't want in EU is an AI that just play to win with no regard to immersion or anything like that. The AI in CIV5 is a major sinner in that. Want to have any sort of long-lasting friendship between you and a neighbour in CIV5? Forget it, suddenly it wants your land, thinks you are going to win, finds you evil for defending yourself, backstabs you while defending yourself, presents awfully one-sided deals, steals your tech and denounces you. You seriously don't want that. You want an AI that acts as a nation would and is not concerned with winning "the game", but rather the balance of power.
As for no attrition for the AI's fleet... Never bothered me too much. Endless loans should go though. AI might need to get a little smarter when waging war though.
As for no attrition for the AI's fleet... Never bothered me too much. Endless loans should go though. AI might need to get a little smarter when waging war though.
When I meant smarter then I didn't mean it like that, they should trust their allies if they had the alliance for like 10 years or so and try as hard as they can to keep the alliance up? unless they have a core on you or you do something really terrible, and I meant especially when waging war, and defeats rebels
Yeah I just wanted to make sure we were on the same page here. I have nothing against making the AI smarter so long it doesn't turn the AI into a 'WIN AT ALL COSTS' machine. It would eliminate any kind of immersive play.
If you don't want the AI to play "like a player" then it needs to cheat rampantly (or otherwise have some kind of massive advantage) in order for it to remain a challenge.
If it was possible for Paradox to make an AI to play as well as a human, I'm sure they would. But since that's impossible the AI needs bonuses to prevent them from presenting no challenge.
Please don't stop the AI from cheating at the highest difficulty level. In fact, please make the highest difficulty level *really* difficult!
I have to back this, especially in a game like this the player is always going to have the advantage of knowing what they "should" be doing. To be a challenge the ai has to either cheat or behave more like a human player which can be immersion breaking as others have pointed out.
This. The AI is as good as paradox can make it. It was pretty good in EU3 to be fair, though it could do with some help handling inflation.
To be honest, the AI cheats only at Hard/Very Hard or with naval attrition. It is possible to bankrupt a nation: you have to let their mercs live, though. If you raze stack after stack, they pay nothing, obviously. And minting gives easily enough money to buy more mercs. Which is why the AI ends up with 40-70 inflation by 1821.
The AI needs to provide a challenge. I'd much prefer the developers work to make it a better opponent than to waste time trying to accomplish this in a particular way.
Disagree. If the game rules are written the way they should, they should force you into playing "in style". I'm against any sort of ponies-and-flowers-mode for the AI, it will end up retarded.
Civ is a game that you play to win. It's not supposed to be a history simulator, just a fun game about building cities and about strategy. If you don't like having the AI play to win, choose easy difficulty. You'll easily end up stronger than the AI and it will no longer attack you nilly-willy. You can then dictate the pace of the game.
That's the thing, though.
In EU there are two very different kind of players - more roleplayers, and play-to-conquer players. In EU3 the AI is basically programed to act like the later (well, to try to). Which is immensely frustrating for the people more into the roleplaying end of things who want a world with fewer wars, more diplomacy, and generally not a world war every generation.
But if it were the reverse, competitive players would feel the AI cannot challenge them.
In EU there are two very different kind of players - more roleplayers, and play-to-conquer players. In EU3 the AI is basically programed to act like the later (well, to try to). Which is immensely frustrating for the people more into the roleplaying end of things who want a world with fewer wars, more diplomacy, and generally not a world war every generation.
But if it were the reverse, competitive players would feel the AI cannot challenge them.
Why couldn't just PI hire guys to play the AIs. Game would be more expensive...but would be totally worth it.
Then the game mechanics should challenge them. If the AI France can't prevent itself from being completely conquered by the player, then that just means that some element needs to be added that makes it easier to defend France. Logistics, or weather, or local resistance, or anything like that.