AI needs to be MUCH more aggressive
 

The AI never seems to press the attack. It will maintain its boundaries with large fleets - but the AI should be coded that if it detects a hostile presence in any system next to one of its systems it will go in and wipe the other empire out. Then, once it reaches a predetermined strength, it expands one system outward and begins the process again.

The AI seems adept at defense, but almost NEVER goes on the offensive. Surely this can be programmed. I remember the massive fleets of MOO2 that would clean up the board. Once the AI has quantum reactors can't it be made to create fleets with the sole objective of destroying enemy colonies??

Before any other options are added to the game - I'd like to see the AI improved to be more offensive.

J2

Re: AI needs to be MUCH more aggressive
 

Space Empires IV has much depth but the hard coded AI is the downfall of the game.

I spent the Last 7-8 months tweaking data files and AI files, downloaded mods,etc. to get an opponent that would not just go thru the motions. The end result was not positive.

Can or will there ever be a patch to get the AI up to snuff? I'm willing to pay for an add-on if that's what is needed.

Is there a 4X game that has depth and an AI that is a challenge to a human opponent?

Re: AI needs to be MUCH more aggressive
 

The AI is pretty bad at making long term strategic military decisions a lot of the time. Right now it mostly attacks planets only if they are in a contested system. I've seen the AI use DN's with quantum reactors as scouts that travel through most of my empire without attacking a single colony. On the other hand I have seen it attack ships/fleets in non-contested systems. I suggested a fix to the forum using a point system to give enemy planets a value for being attacked or captured within 3 or 4 warps of the border using a recursive search. The AI could just total up the points based on different characteristics such as the planet's size, breathable/non-breathable atmosphere, resource value, and any important facilities. Then it would just pick out what it considered to be the most important target and go off and attack.

The algorithm itself shouldn't be difficult it's just add up values and sort for the largest although you would probably want to randomize that somewhat so it wasn't too predictable. The hitch is that the AI would need to perform reconaissance or intel missions and then remember that data. Hopefully it isn't so complicated that Aaron can't add in something like this in a future patch.

Re: AI needs to be MUCH more aggressive
 

The problem isn't that the AI is too friendly (lack aggrssion). The AI is merely too dumb - too aggressive, even.

"Know thy enemies..." someone once said (I think). Not until the AI is hardcoded so it can learn from its own mistakes and "remeber" important stuff will it be the challange you seek.

The AI must "understand" when to strike - how to strike - IF to strike. Today it can't make those kind of judgement why they just - strike.

It should be possible to make peace with the AI for instance.

Re: AI needs to be MUCH more aggressive
 

Anyone played Europa Univeralis? That game has a pretty good AI in my opinion. You can grease it, piss it off, ally with it (and it actually helps you in war), make peace and some other stuff. Don't remember it all now since it's been awhile since I Last played the game.

Re: AI needs to be MUCH more aggressive
 

If your we're going to make AI more intressing to play with would you need more files (you'd need a bigger file any way) , my reasoning behind this - to make it harder to play against you would new more veribles with are to others?

Re: AI needs to be MUCH more aggressive
 

I played EU and didn't find the AI in it really any more intelligent than in SE4. It utilizes an excellent rules hierachy in its political system which since it is such a large element of the game may give the impression of intelligence. The system is made to hamper the human player as much as help the AI as there is only so much territory you can demand in a peace treaty for example. But it made as many goofy moves as SE4 does. You offer it a peace proposal that it give you a city province and a colony and it refuses only to offer you 3 city provinces the very next month. I found it very uneven in the handling of units. It too would do the equilvalent of sending single ships through a minefield with its naval ships. It is a little better in its handling of politics because of the rules, but even there it would make bonehead moves like in my Last game. I had Austria down to only its capitol province (which cannot be surrendered) and several 100,000 men armies surrounding it and it would up and declare war one day with its 15,000 men and the next day realizing the folly of its error I guess beg for a white peace.

Re: AI needs to be MUCH more aggressive
 

True, the EU AI can also make stupid decisions. But you can't accuse it of not being aggressive and following up on attacks. I once played as Sweden (of course) and Russia declared war on me (of course) and Turkey that was in the same alliance as Russia also declared war on me. I figured I didn't have to worry about Turkey much since they wheren't exactly my next door neighbour if you know what I mean. A couple of months after the war started a Turkish fleet is sighted off the coast of Gothenburg and promptly lands a force of about 45 000 men. Very surprising and very bad since the bulk of my army was off fighting in Russia. I sent my fleet to chase away the Turkish fleet and took some loans to raise a new army in Stockholm to smash the Turks. Took me awhile and some chasing, but I finally got rid of them. Imo the EU AI is better than the SE4 at going after a goal so to speak.

Re: AI needs to be MUCH more aggressive
 

The AI build files should also include the ability to respond to enemy designs. The game already allows tracking of other race's technology; it should be straightforward to include certain areas in the AI state. For instance, if an enemy has seeker or fighter tech, change AI state to "war_seekers" and build ships with extra PD. The problem here is when multiple enemies are encountered, each with different weapon mixes; in that case, the AI would have to be able to build different sets of ships at appropriate locations. I have no idea how to script that within the current framework.

As for pressing an attack, I've seen the AI be very persistent with attacking border systems. Unfortunately, I've never given the AI a chance to extend its attack, because I haven't given up a system (yet). However, I agree that the first order of business for an AI at war should be sending a fleet to my closest known planet, glassing/invading that planet, and then exploring the warp points in that system to find the next planet. I think one of the reasons the AI isn't doing that now is that other ministers pre-empt fleet orders, so that a given fleet is ordered to attack one location, and then the next turn is ordered elsewhere to respond to some other "crisis" that would be better met by either creating another fleet or redirecting a different fleet. As others have said, the AI needs to "remember" from turn to turn what it's objectives are, and what fleets are responding to that objective.

Re: AI needs to be MUCH more aggressive
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jubala:
True, the EU AI can also make stupid decisions. But you can't accuse it of not being aggressive and following up on attacks. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I wasn't accusing it of that, The Austrians were certainly aggressive, if stupid. But it is uneven. I had the French declare war on me (English) early in the game and attempt to take Calais. Over a period of months there were a furious set of battles with several provinces changing hands several times. Though I had captured two provinces to none lost, I was on the ropes having only a force numbering 23,000 left on the continent with no prospects of reinforcing them. Meanwhile France was bringing up several large armies in excess of 70,000 troops each. So what does he do, he offers a peace treaty surrendering to me the provinces I had captured which I immediately accepted. That would have never have happened against a human who would have pressed his advantage, surely to the point of retaking the lost provinces if not kicking me out of Calais altogether. That 23,000 was all I had left to prevent his victory.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> Imo the EU AI is better than the SE4 at going after a goal so to speak.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would agree to a point. What I'm not sure of is how much of that "going after a goal" is due to the RTS nature of the game? How frequently did it evaluate making changes to those goals? SE4 is turn-based and essentially it makes that evaluation every turn. There were many times the EU AI clearly did not follow through when any human would have and to me that is part of the going after a goal such as above. Did it suffer from a memory lapse same as SE4 due to a re-evaluation of its goals? Clearly SE4 would benefit from some ability to recognize a goal and remember what it was doing in future turns.