pretty quiet in the forum lately

[usmcrave99]

Originally Posted by Skirmisher

I've been playing an old game I've had awhile called warzone 2100.

The computer beats me up again and again while playing the AI.

WS is a game where I win again and again. The AI is a cream puff.

Now It's interesting that Shrapnel can come out and say that "multiplayer quirks have been addressed" and yet nobody
is actually testing multiplayer.

Very true. I first started complaining about the AI with Beta v.18, and it went up to v.22 before 1.0 was released, so there was plenty of time to try to fix the AI after the financials were fixed. The AI was more difficult, or at least took forever to defeat, prior to the current financial model.

[spillblood]

What were the differences in the beta-versions? I got this game after beta state, so I'd be interested in that. Was the AI better in the beta versions? Hehe, I think even the AI in TripleA (freeware Axis & Allies clone), where the developers admit that it doesn't have a good AI yet, is better than in World Supremacy. The WS developers could definitely draw some inspiration out of A&A to improve the combat system (retreat option!).
Another great example for a good AI in an Indie strategy game are Castle Vox and Lux Delux by Sillysoft. Just check them out, I've almost never won against the strong AIs in Castle Vox.
WS simply needs a better AI to be fun!
It's simply boring when you win all games.