This is absolutely the worst type of cheats that can be used in a game, i.e. the one that will render plausible strategies useless. If that happens, then something somewhere went totally wrong.
-
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.
Well, yeah. It is amazingly easy to change the majority of AI cheats in EU3 and it is not hardcoded at all. It's a .txt document.
AI coding is really hard. Before criticising Paradox (or any other game studio) please do a little research...
I would rather see the AI cheat transparently and provide me with a good game than play by the rules and be as crushable as a balsa wood dummy.
Of course, the ideal would be a copy of a developer's brain downloaded and finely tuned to trash us⸮
I would rather see the AI cheat transparently and provide me with a good game than play by the rules and be as crushable as a balsa wood dummy.
Of course, the ideal would be a copy of a developer's brain downloaded and finely tuned to trash us⸮
Heres the thing though: the warmongers already have their own games. Civilization, Total War, etc.
Let Europa Universalis be for the roleplayers, as it was originally intended.
Don't be so pretentious
I have been playing the franchise since 2002 and never cared about roleplaying. I don't want to conquer the world but by god if the French or Austrians give me smack I'll tear them down...
At the start of each game, there would be a set of personalities for the AI to play, will it become a friendly guy or the play to win guy. The personality should be randomize among the AI population. Also the historical successful country gets the play to win AI. The minor ones get randomized.
We could even do that for rulers too. As Diplomacy Ruler is Nice, War leader is a bully, Admin Ruler is nice, expansive.
The personality should be randomize among the AI population. Also the historical successful country gets the play to win AI. The minor ones get randomized.We could even do that for rulers too. As Diplomacy Ruler is Nice, War leader is a bully, Admin Ruler is nice, expansive.
To me it depends on what the cheat or AI behavior is. Something that is pretty under the hood does not intrude much on immersion, like bonuses on income or cost reductions. Something that produces unrealistic gamey results bugs me. IRL, Estonia doesn't declare war on Russia because it is "too big" - Estonia tries not to irritate Russia to much and/or looks for a big friend under whose "umbrella" it can stand. If its a 19th Century game and I'm playing Britain in the Zulu War, I should not need to worry about the possibility that the Zulus sneak thousands of miles and come up the Thames in canoes.
Im not saying roleplaying should be the only permissable playstyle. Im just saying that if the devs have to go with either warmongery or roleplayingy, then for this particlular series they should lean towards roleplaying. I similarly would expect the total war devs to lean towards warmongering. It's simply catering to the respective game's primary demograpics.
Cheating AI is quite frankly, a symptom of lazy development. It happens when the AI just isn't good enough to compete on equal terms with the player and it ruins immersion.
Now, I'll grant you, developing high quality AI isn't easy and I get that paradox will have to take *some* shortcuts. Indeed, EU3 has one of the best AI's or at least illusions of AI's I've come across. But let's be honest, that isn't very great praise given the state of AI in games today.
I really hope Paradox puts some serious effort into minimizing cheating and making the AI able to compete with us on our own terms. Maintaining a massive army isn't that hard quite frankly, if the AI can focus on a strong economy then it will be able to afford a strong army.
I for one play EU3 on the principle that gold wins wars, and it usually does, certainly that isn't all there is too it but a strong financial AI means it can play with fewer pillows sown under it's arms.
I really only have one thing to ask from Paradox, and that is that you do your very best in terms of AI, make it a top priority and try your best to impress our pants off.
Europa Universalis is never going to be the prettiest game, it's never going to be the most action packed game and I thank the paradox log on my screen daily for it, because non of us play your games for the gfx or heart stopping action, we play them because you make games that challenge us to think.
So make an effort, splurge on an AI specialist or two, we all know EU4 is going to be your biggest seller in years, you'd have to literally make a concerted effort to have sails not top EU3 and CK2. Speaking of, CK2 has brought a large new audience to your games, some of whom have already stopped by the #pdox channel on quakenet asking for help with EU3, I'm sure you've got a shiny graph detailing a boost in EU3 sales post CK2 so EU4 is set to become a money maker in a big way. Consolidate your gain by making EU4 have the best AI you can possibly get, with as little tacky cheating as possible, and you'll no doubt see a positive result from it on your balance sheet.
I mean let's be honest, Paradox seems like a developer who enjoy playing their own games but in the end it's the money that rules, so be greedy and make an AI that'll stand out.
Now, I'll grant you, developing high quality AI isn't easy and I get that paradox will have to take *some* shortcuts. Indeed, EU3 has one of the best AI's or at least illusions of AI's I've come across. But let's be honest, that isn't very great praise given the state of AI in games today.
I really hope Paradox puts some serious effort into minimizing cheating and making the AI able to compete with us on our own terms. Maintaining a massive army isn't that hard quite frankly, if the AI can focus on a strong economy then it will be able to afford a strong army.
I for one play EU3 on the principle that gold wins wars, and it usually does, certainly that isn't all there is too it but a strong financial AI means it can play with fewer pillows sown under it's arms.
I really only have one thing to ask from Paradox, and that is that you do your very best in terms of AI, make it a top priority and try your best to impress our pants off.
Europa Universalis is never going to be the prettiest game, it's never going to be the most action packed game and I thank the paradox log on my screen daily for it, because non of us play your games for the gfx or heart stopping action, we play them because you make games that challenge us to think.
So make an effort, splurge on an AI specialist or two, we all know EU4 is going to be your biggest seller in years, you'd have to literally make a concerted effort to have sails not top EU3 and CK2. Speaking of, CK2 has brought a large new audience to your games, some of whom have already stopped by the #pdox channel on quakenet asking for help with EU3, I'm sure you've got a shiny graph detailing a boost in EU3 sales post CK2 so EU4 is set to become a money maker in a big way. Consolidate your gain by making EU4 have the best AI you can possibly get, with as little tacky cheating as possible, and you'll no doubt see a positive result from it on your balance sheet.
I mean let's be honest, Paradox seems like a developer who enjoy playing their own games but in the end it's the money that rules, so be greedy and make an AI that'll stand out.
Hmm, to add my thought to this discussion: Since EU4 has leaders with various traits, why not make an AI more warlike if it has a military-focused leader, or more peaceful if it has a more diplomatically minded leader?
One thing which would help would be to make it more accessible to modders. Though I never master it, AGCEEP, and it offspring, EP, did a lot of good stuff in EUII. Helius has done about as much as can be done (I think) in EUIII, but even in SRI, it was very frustrating.
As it is, we cannot figure out how to push the AI to explore certain areas, at least, not with any degree of consistency.
As it is, we cannot figure out how to push the AI to explore certain areas, at least, not with any degree of consistency.
You can certainly minimise cheating, but if you want a challenge, the AI will have to use cheats of some sorts. The game is simply too complex to create a non-cheating AI that can be a good challenge for an average player - well, technically it's probably possible, but not really feasible, given the limited resources at the disposal of the devs. What I'm hoping for is the AI that doesn't do boneheaded mistakes on a regular basis and isn't easily outmanoeuvred during wars.
Agreed. The best system is no cheats at all on Normal diff, and clear and transparent boni on Hard/VH for the AI. Mirrored for the player on East, VE...
But an even playing field in normal is pretty important to me.
IMO the ideal course would not to try to make the computer smart enough to compete with the player, since it's impossible, but to simply make it robust enough that it doesn't make blatantly stupid decisions or is easily exploitable. Then just give it bonuses on higher difficulties.
The most blatant cases are:
* It ignores Fog of War
* It ignores Terra Incognita (this might be fixed in the latest expansion, not sure; but in the older ones it knew you had a colony somewhere - and would happily send people to seize it in a war - even if it didn't have the area explored)
* It has no naval attrition (this is fixable by adding events which randomly damage/destroy ships out at sea, if I remember correctly)
* It has significant bonuses to leader skills, money and so on (only with "Lucky Nations" on, which is why I never use it)
I think that the FOW thing is a necessity and I wouldn't be surprised if it was present in EUIV, too. The AI doesn't really "plan" the way the player does, so it needs some help in order to be able to grasp the strategic situation.
But maybe it should have some intelligence level. It is ok to get information very soon about a leaving fleet in the mediteran see. But that Bremen knows if the portoguese fleet leaves macao in an instant is really not a good feature. Maybe restrict the seeknowledge of the ai to her supply ship range?
Well, yeah, the question is whether this "cheat" should be limited or unlimited. We don't know how good the AI will be, though, so it's hard to answer this.
Why cheat there? Is there any problem if the AI only knows fleet locations the same way the player does (neighbouring armies, provinces, or fleets)?