Restricting AI death scale?
 

Any way to do this?

I hate when the ai commits long term suicide.

Forcing a non-death scale on non-abysia/ermor seems like a good option. The jotuns are especially fond of a death scale, which given their supply issues is just horrid.

Besides which it makes their provs barely worth taking over after early game, assuming one has a stable dominion boundary.


Thanks for any thoughts,

Rabe

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

Well, I agree... I've mentioned it before. DT Ctis should be allowed a Death scale too (and any future theme with unholy priests). But otherwise, the AI gets more points than humans... and should never take a death scale, if only for supply reasons.

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

The AI should also be a bit more proactive in dispelling Burden of Time. I've had a single casting of the spell running for almost 40 turns as Soulgate Ermor, and Marignon has made no attempt to dispel it, even though they've got mages that can cast the army telporting spell. After running for that long, there's no real challenge left, as all the provinces have been decimated.

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

From what I've used with death magic... playing Ermor against the AI opponents makes for a real easy game. And Burden of Time makes the game way too easy. I would only play Ermor against multiple human opponents.

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

Burden of time cast by an ai opponent however, may be the only way for the ai to "win". This brings up a change from Dom1 to Dom2 that I think is for the worse, and that is the dispell mechanic. Having to research enchantment 5 to be prepared against burdensome globals is painful.

I very much agree that living ai should not take death scales.

[ December 15, 2003, 23:28: Message edited by: Truper ]

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well if you won the game against the AI by just casting Burden of Time; then obviously you need to scale up your difficulty and AI opponents. I believe the issue is that the AI doesn't actively either Dispel or destroy the nation casting such a spell, or probably even knows of it's existance. It just calculates it's actions based on it's current army composition and province situation.

Ermor are not overpowering in MP by any degree though are very solid; but you do have to deal with them in a different manner than I feel the AI does. And it is often a misconception of Ermor SP players to treat MP opponents to AI, which causes their quick and ugly downfall.

[ December 15, 2003, 23:50: Message edited by: Zen ]

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

Ive been trying to consider this from the other side. We have people saying that the AI doesnt play efficiently. In the case of gems that would usually mean that gems get used up as much as possible? There will always be disagreements on what should be done. Certain spells cast, using astrals to boost research, summonings.

Id say having astrals used to boost research is probably the easiest answer for all nations. Now someone casts burden of Time. The AI would have to decide to save up in order to expel it.

So every turn the AI should check for a global spell. If there is one then dont use astrals. When you have enough astrals then try a dispel.
All globals? A list of certain globals? How many astrals over the minimum should the AI gamble on an expel?

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

Most of the Pretenders the AI uses are usually well versed in Astral or favored commanders. So it would not be inconcievable for the AI to hoard gems (or better yet, store and alchemize upon need) in order to Dispel a powerful global. From what I see; if they are using their gem income, it's probably on empowerment.

Certain Globals I believe the AI should have an increasing chance per turn of it being effect to 'cheat' and know what it takes to Dispel and do what it takes to do it ASAP. Ones that come to mind are:

Illwinter (for any non-cold friendly nation)
Burden of Time (non-undead)
The Looming Hell
Gift of Nature's Bounty
Arcane Nexus
Thetis' Blessing (for water nations)
Wrath of the Sea (for anyone with more than 5 costal provinces)
Second Sun (for any non-heat friendly nation)
Utterdark (non-undead)
Well of Misery

Most should be self-explainatory. Other than that; the computer should try to dispel any gem producing Global as soon as it has a reasonable chance to do so.

[ December 16, 2003, 10:05: Message edited by: Zen ]

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That's not what I said...
what I was saying was that playing Ermor against all computer opponents makes for an easy game.

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Uhm.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Does human mean AI?

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

YOUR MISSING THE POINT

playing Ermor against all computer opponents makes for an easy game... thus I suggested the game only be played against human opponents when using Ermor for those who can.

your misunderstandings include:
Zen said:
won the game against the AI by just casting Burden of Time (I NEVER SAID THAT)

Zen said:
Ermor are not overpowering in MP by any degree (NEVER SAID THEY WERE FOR MP)
-if this was intended for someone else you didn't include their quote.

[ December 18, 2003, 05:44: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">No, I think that you're missing the point.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Which is what Zen agreed with.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You said that it made the game too easy, which means essentially the same thing.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Why are you so upset that somebody agreed with you?

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You said that it made the game too easy, which means essentially the same thing. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">WRONG...
example: Using a car to travel across the USA makes traveling across way too easy when compared with other ground vehicles. Doesn't mean the car alone will be enough to acomplish this task.
just because one item, creature or spell makes the game much easier doesn't mean that single feature will win the game. There are many aspects of the game which work together.


<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Which is what Zen agreed with. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana"><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Why are you so upset that somebody agreed with you? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I never get upset posting on forums. However your sentence structure is written as if you disagreed with someone who said Ermor was overpowering. There was nothing to show confirmation either such as :
"That's True" or "Same experiences here" or something

[ December 18, 2003, 17:13: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That can be said for any nation, not just Ermor. Once you learn the weaknesses of the AI; then you can abuse them regardless of whatever nation you choose.

Where the AI works for Ermor is it doesn't mass produce priests, preach dominion and take domains, even for 1 turn, to stop the steady accumulation of forces by domain. Or using global spells and sieging castles with large Groups of reanimation crews and stopping the production of the 'elite' of Ermor.

However; even if you play on impossible with 17 opponents, on a mid-sized map, so you don't have the time it takes to sit on a Cache of provinces to create your armies you are going to have to work for it; unless you exploit the AI.

I don't know what your argument here is, if it's not that "Ermor is too easy if I use Burdern of Time too" or "I'd only play Ermor vs humans" (which means to me, other players).

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That can be said for any nation, not just Ermor. Once you learn the weaknesses of the AI; then you can abuse them regardless of whatever nation you choose. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">My statement was specifically about Ermor and a very powerful spell not the other nations... since the topic is related with the AI death scale.


<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Regarding my original post... there was no argument only a statement.
The quotes:
{Ermor is too easy if I use Burdern of Time too}
True when playing against only computer opponents.
{I'd only play Ermor vs humans}
True statement

[ December 18, 2003, 19:02: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

Yes, what I'm saying is that ANY nation can be. Regardless of Death scales. Take Pythium for example.

And in regards to your comments, try 17 opponents on a cramped map with Ermor on Impossible; and you might think differently.

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">OF COURSE any nation can be... but most other nations are not related to this TOPIC.

17 opponents on a cramped map with impossible settings is a game more based on LUCK then strategy.

[ December 18, 2003, 19:09: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

In what way? You were commenting on how you the player cast Burden of Time playing Ermor impacted the game. Not the fact that 50% of the AI Pretenders design has some death scale which cripples them.

And the only luck portion of it is what you do with what you are given; that is where the strategy comes into play.

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Burden of Time response was a response from the previous post which also mentioned 'Burden of Time'. Works in conjunction with Death Scale.


<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">OH MY HEAVENS... THIS IS SO WRONG!
There are so many unknown variables regarding AI attack decisions, events, magic sites, etc..., etc... . THESE ARE LUCK ! Not much to do in a game where 4 Impossible AI opponents decide to make you the first kill on a cramped map.

[ December 18, 2003, 19:44: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">There was no mention of working in conjunction; but that the AI is not proactive in dispelling it, or any other global enchantment which has negative impacts on them. It has less to do with the death scale in a 'living' enviroment, but more to do with being undead and not being affected by the spell.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Not really. There are alot of different variables, but keeping AI's from attacking you is not totally regulated to luck. Also there is the strategy of how and why you expand, and who and why you attack and how you do it. Giving up aspects to 'luck' is an excuse and not compensating for it. Maybe too much 'luck' for someone who wants to play a game in a certain fashion that they have learned to be effective against the AI.

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">There was no mention of working in conjunction; but that the AI is not proactive in dispelling it, or any other global enchantment which has negative impacts on them. It has less to do with the death scale in a 'living' enviroment, but more to do with being undead and not being affected by the spell.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">My response for Burden of Time works in conjunction with the AI death scale.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Not really. There are alot of different variables, but keeping AI's from attacking you is not totally regulated to luck. Also there is the strategy of how and why you expand, and who and why you attack and how you do it. Giving up aspects to 'luck' is an excuse and not compensating for it. Maybe too much 'luck' for someone who wants to play a game in a certain fashion that they have learned to be effective against the AI. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Of course there are ways to help influence the AI from attacking you... but nothing is guaranteed. With the map settings you suggested... that game is mostly based on luck. Think about it... a game with a large map and only 2 players would obviously have more strategy.

[ December 18, 2003, 20:12: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

Yes there are guarentees, maybe you haven't found them out yet.

And no, not really 2 people on a large map is a production war; not really a strategy war. There are elements of strategy used; but you lose so much I wouldn't consider strategy as much a factor as other things in that scenario. You wouldn't think about half the things you must in a large-multi opponent game.

If that is your definition of strategy then mine differs completely from it and I have way of looking at it from your perspective. Obviously any sort of comments from my view are not applicable to how you play the game.

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If there's a 'guaranteed' way to completely prevent 4 Impossible AI opponents from attacking on a cramped map... then I'm sure someone would have complained. On a large map... yeah tricks can work, but not for the map size you mentioned. AI opponents attacking is not the only random unknown variable either.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Again I would have to disagree as there are important growing and attack decisions made during the game. 'Production War' is someone's excuse for not knowing how to use stealth or magic to tip the scales. You may produce 100 xyz units... but how I attack and use my 80 xyz units could allow me to slaughter your 100 xyz units.

[ December 18, 2003, 21:08: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

They are and have. Try experimenting with giving things to the AI. Before they declare war on you.

And yes, it is a production war, whether its mage production, unit production, stealth production etc.

You will always be able to win against the AI if you give yourself enough time in a large map to produce in mass what you know the opponent will not I.E. Combat Mages.

And you will always be able to use 80 xyz units better than the computer's 100 xyz units, because it doesn't have human thought. And you don't even have to do that, because the AI will split it's forces for you.

Where the strategy comes into play is when you have to have 80 xyz units vs 1 computers 100 xyz units, 1 computers 50 xyz units and cutting the supply of xyz computer at the same time.

It's an excuse to say it's luck if it's not how you've played the game before.

[ December 18, 2003, 21:17: Message edited by: Zen ]

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

The AI will still attack you even before declaring War.

Again there are important growing and attack decisions made during the game. Strategy is still a factor even for a large map set for 2 players as the human can test his skills against the turn-based clock... where it will take more then your 'production war' to defeat a previous victory.

On a cramped map with maximum AI opponents you don't have time to be making and giving items or gems! AI can be attacking you as early as day_3 ! Maybe you continue rerolling the map until no AI opponents start near you where that can work.

Why you're ignoring the variables of luck in the game is definitely unusual.

[ December 18, 2003, 21:28: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Re: Restricting AI death scale?
 

Yes it can, but it's unusual for 4 to attack you by turn 3. You can hold off the rest from attacking you while you fight that one.

Luck is a factor, but it's not the entirety. And even with bad luck you can beat them, by using strategy and not luck.

Like I said before; there is no way that you will understand any viewpoint other than those you present if you play in that particular fashion. Just as I can't see how it's a 'uber strategy game' playing 1 opponent on a large map. All I consider it is a slaughter since the AI isn't up to it.

If you want what you are saying. Try Gandalf's map where he allies all the computers and try that. It removes all of the 'luck' and regulates it to strategy and a war of attrition.

I haven't ignored them, but you have to learn to compensate for them, regardless. It's luck if you get a good initial position and type of independants beside you or not, which is the largest and most determining factor that I've found. But I don't disillusion myself to it being 'all about luck' when you provide as many variables as the luck does.

[ December 18, 2003, 22:11: Message edited by: Zen ]