The missing challange is what keeps it from being "4x of the year" for me. Mind you: It is still far more FUN then most other 4x, but it would be AWESOME if it was an actuall challange as well. I own most of the 4x games and MoO definitly has the worst AI right now. I strongly disagree that it is on paar with medium quality 4x games. I am lost for words how anyone could possibly defend that kind of "AI". Even their biggest fleets by turn 400ish can not kill a SINGLE titan. Or just fly by with a single titan and use a stellar converter to ruin their day. you can easily get enough votes to not need any other nation. Even if i try to not win the AI never catches up and at some point i just vote for myself in the senate and win by that. A very hard AI should not even remotly let me get ahead by a factor of 5-20 (!) in every category. If all the AI does is possibly slow your auto win down, then the AI is not good enough. No value of bonuses can make an AI a challange if it does not know how to win the game. So I encourage developers not only to try and make it more effective (their abilities as good players are a must for this) but also to give AI more bonuses, and test hardest difficulty on very, very strong players. I am not sure that developers use hi-tech AI technologies like expert systems or neuronets, but even if they do AI probaly would need to get bonuses to resist against good players. AI is generally a weak point of strategy games and usually buffed by hy bonuses to make it challenging. I disagree, now the AI is of medium quality with AI of other games. After that the other leaders go into "afraid" mode and do whatever i want them to. When the first AI attacks me i usually have 5 times their fleet size already and just take their planets. The Player just has to take more then 30 colonies and pretty much auto wins.Īlso since EA 2 the AI does not seem to declare war for fast expansion anymore. They stop expanding at around 30ish planets, even tho there is half a galaxy to be had still. AI does not even try to win the game right now. For now player should just be carefull not to trigger "he is colonising too fast" for nations with which he can not fight (with all of them) right now. Very often I do not see from nations reasonable attempts to win a game. I also not quite sure that AI now is generally up to winning the game, sometimes it looks like it more about simulating some nation leader which just lives on with thoughts that if someone else would be a winner then so be it. It would be more replayable, more surprising and a more remarkable game that way. That was really cool and would be great to have even on the highest difficulty, even if it means the game wouldn't be always "hard". One thing that really moved me while playing the new MoO, was how the tone of the game wanted to reduce war and suffering, while the opponents demanded equality if I expanded too fast, meaning I could facilitate a more peaceful galaxy by being considerate of others. Things like converting angry factions to compassionate ones would be cool and vice versa. Having an element of random behaviours with some factions wanting to be compassionate, while others are more nihilists, fully realizing the pursuit of all 5 win-conditions, instead of focusing on only conquest on the highest difficulty. That said, I'd prefer the highest difficulty to be more smarter, more fully realized, have more foresight and be more unpredictable than actually more unforgiving and more hateful. I'd really appreciate the hardest difficulty being "the way its really meant to be", while the lesser difficulties are reduced version of that, helping you train on those easier difficulties to take on the real, ultimate challenge of the highest difficulty. Thank you, I agree with that logic Severian.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |