Dominions 2. AI. Suggestions, that how to fix it.

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally posted by Mortifer:
Someone have said that the devs will know that what and how. I agree with this. They've scripted the AI, they know the major AI weaknesses now. We've made our suggestions already. Just my 2 cents.

OK we can back off on the discussions if everyone REALLY feels its left in the Devs hands. But the devs havent said they agree with all of those suggestions.

I thought the people who kept raising the list to the top wanted to pursue the subject along the lines that the devs had mentioned in their response. If the thread keeps jumping up then I will jump back in to discuss things further.

[NTJedi]

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
If the thread keeps jumping up then I will jump back in to discuss things further.

50% of the recent Posts here are from you jumping back in keeping the thread at the top. I think the devs got what they needed... did you?

[Mortifer]

Originally posted by NTJedi:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
If the thread keeps jumping up then I will jump back in to discuss things further.

50% of the recent Posts here are from you jumping back in keeping the thread at the top. I think the devs got what they needed... did you?

---

Well, IF the devs want us to make detailed examples like what should the AI build, than I will post MY ideas. But those will be my ideas, prolly we all have different opinion about this topic. That is why I've said that details like this are not vital for the devs...IMHO.
I guess they will know how to fix those things from the list. BUT if they really need such details, I will be glad to help in that.

[ November 12, 2003, 15:18: Message edited by: Mortifer ]

[licker]

I don't know if the devs got what they needed or not. Anyway, its silly to just stop the discussion, though you are free to stop reading it if it bothers you for some reason.

What is unknown at this point is how the bug and balance changes will influance the AI's army composition (since that's mainly what we are dealing with here). There's no reason to stop debating what a good army mix should be, even as we hope that the simple fixes (coming in the patch I assume) may have fixed some of these issues.

Besides Gandalf is playing an important role in these discussions, he's challenging everyone who steps in and says 'this isn't good' to give some details on how they would make it better. The more specifics you give the better off the discussion will be. If you arn't interested (or cannot supply) the specifics then don't bother complaining when someone else tries to provide some.

Anyway, we all seem to have faith in the devs, but even they benefit from reading these discussions, as I said, if you don't benefit from it, stop reading it.

[Mortifer]

Originally posted by licker:
I don't know if the devs got what they needed or not. Anyway, its silly to just stop the discussion, though you are free to stop reading it if it bothers you for some reason.

You are right licker...but I hope that you understand my point about this.
{{This is a very complicated thing, thus we all have different ideas. Now if we will post 20 different things, that surely won't help.}}
Hm however it won't cause any probs at all, so yes why not..

[licker]

I wasn't actually replying to your post Mortifer

It just got in the way, that's all

I think all of this discussion is worthwhile and interesting. If the devs agree, great, if they don't... it's still not hurting anything, and some of us can read between the lines and improve our own games from this discussion

[LordArioch]

I'd advise testing the AI on different difficulty levels. The easiest game I had against the AI was against all impossibles, about default settings. I personally defeated 2 ai players by turn 20, which is unheard of by me on even normal difficulty. Admittedly jotunheim with a blade wind casting pretender didn't hurt...but even so.