Ermor balance?

[Curath]

Originally posted by Agrajag:
(Pffft, lots of quotes)
I don't know the games you are talking about, but in many games you can observe the computer cheating, and in many ways:
1. He has more units than he could afford with his current mines/income.
2. A vastly superiour army of yours "somehow" manages to lose to his inferior one (sometimes its just luck though :\)
3. In certain games the AI may get better starting units.
4. He acts REALLY dumb and still wins =P [/QB]

Heh, most of these "seem" to fit Civilization 3, which is a pretty good game too. The AI shuffles around troops that makes no sense whatsoever. As to number 2, it's actually a fault of the game mechanics. A tank division losing to a phalanx of spearmen isn't even bad luck as such. With all sorts of defensive bonuses the phalanx has something like 1 in 3 chance of winning a combat round, and all units have just a few "HP", enhanced with experience (unlike Civ 2 where more advanced units had lots more HP too).

If I recall correctly, in Civ 3 the highest difficulty gives the AIs a slight technology research advantage, plus they're generally more aggressive towards the player. Third highest difficulty the tables are even.

[deccan]

Originally posted by Agrajag:
The one thing I hate about those things though is that most computer games (I think that doesnt include dominions) use cheating AIs anyway, if you played the RTS game "Blah blah's city of Evil" (fictional name, DUH) when you put the AI on "Super Tough and Impossible to Beat without Resorting to Reprogramming of the game" difficulty, it would just get half prices for all units, or free income, or double stats for units or any number of other things.

Does anyone know for sure how the AI gets more difficult in Dominions 2 at higher difficulty levels? Does it get smarter or does it get bonuses?

[The Panther]

I think the main reason the AI opponents cannot handle Ermor is because of the simplistic way in which the game measures army size:
One troop of ANY kind = 1 army in the graph.

This is clearly bogus. I mean, 1 hydra = 1 militia? Not hardly.

So, the AI sees Ermor growing huge and is afraid to attack it. The human player knows that Ermor needs 2-3 times the army size just to be close to even. The AI has no clue on this. The AI then picks on Ulm, seeing the small army in the graph. The AI refuses to declare war on Ermor, thinking it has the baddest army, even though it is mostly paper thin. Eventually, since ermor is left alone, it DOES get the baddest army.

Also, the simplistic way in which the game keeps track of armies really warps the army size graph. Ermor is so much higher on the graph that the other races tend to squish down into the bottom of the graph, making it hard to see who is really doing well.

All they need to fix this is to modify the army size to make a troop approximately worth its true value. Something like 1*gold + 2*resources + Bonus (like for sacred) for each troop. A lot of programing perhaps, but far more realistic than what it does now.

[Norfleet]

So, the AI sees Ermor growing huge and is afraid to attack it. The human player knows that Ermor needs 2-3 times the army size just to be close to even. The AI has no clue on this. The AI then picks on Ulm, seeing the small army in the graph. The AI refuses to declare war on Ermor, thinking it has the baddest army, even though it is mostly paper thin. Eventually, since ermor is left alone, it DOES get the baddest army.

Actually, the AI isn't afraid to attack Ermor, but it doesn't do so successfully: Fighting Ermor requires that you exploit its weaknesses, rather than attempt to dogpile it with superior numbers. Even really good, strong troops can hold out rather well, but the AI doesn't build these: It builds tons of indy crap, which doesn't stand a chance against a mile wide mass of undead, as he does not back them with effective mages or priests. Furthermore, Death Magic, Ermor's primary mode, is the magic type most effectively utilized by the AI in battle, due to its simple and straightforward self-contained combos, which the AI itself likes the cast by default.

Also, the simplistic way in which the game keeps track of armies really warps the army size graph. Ermor is so much higher on the graph that the other races tend to squish down into the bottom of the graph, making it hard to see who is really doing well.

The Army graph is so misleading it's not even really useful. A vast army of Mictlan slave patrollers, while totally useless in battle, can rival the size of anyone's army, while contributing absolutely nothing in real combat performance. Besides, the AI is not daunted by visual squashing, since it is #blind and suffers no ill effects from lost eyes or the blindness affliction.

All they need to fix this is to modify the army size to make a troop approximately worth its true value. Something like 1*gold + 2*resources + Bonus (like for sacred) for each troop. A lot of programing perhaps, but far more realistic than what it does now.

So how do you assess the fact that Ermor's troops are cheap-as-free, and have neither gold nor resource cost? Obviously, they're still worth SOMETHING.

Does anyone know for sure how the AI gets more difficult in Dominions 2 at higher difficulty levels? Does it get smarter or does it get bonuses?

It gets more Dpoints (Design Points) to create their pretender is all.