SE5 Demo Bug Reports & Annoyances/Requests

MarkSheppard · #1 September 20th, 2006, 05:23 PM

Quote:

P.S. I also have issues with the ship design boxes. I actually like the idea, and directional combat is something that I certainly can take. But when I buy a Bridge Module for 10 Tons and a Rock Colony Module for 100 Tons and the each take up 1 square I loose interest in that part of designing ships.

Oh that's an EXCELLENT suggestion; it would really help with preventing the smaller ships from becoming "uber" late in the game.

arthurtuxedo · #2 September 20th, 2006, 05:30 PM

On treaties, I like the new options, but the AI doesn't seem to have any understanding of them at all. Perhaps there should be a number of set "packages" of options, and those are the only ones the AI will recognize. They'll never suggest, for instance, a ban on research, and if you offer it, they will simply edit it out in the counter-proposal. That way, it's a lot more balanced for single player, and we still get all the advanced options for multiplayer.

StarShadow · #3 September 20th, 2006, 05:39 PM

In that case..what is the point of all the new diplomacy options, if the AI just ignores any that aren't part of a pre-defined package? I don't play multi-player, and even if I did, why should all the new functionality of diplomacy be reserved for multi-player?

Raapys · #4 September 20th, 2006, 05:51 PM

I don't do multiplayer either, and the change I was mostly looking forward to was the AI( and the modding possibilities). Can't really say it's been impressive thus far. If it really isn't much better in the full version, how much of an improvement can be expected from modding it?

Ragnarok-X · #5 September 20th, 2006, 05:59 PM

Probably none, since there is no actually artificial intelligence. It just reacts according to the settings given to it.

StarShadow · #6 September 20th, 2006, 06:07 PM

That's about all AI is at the moment. The best AI's could probably come up with creative solutions to situations (within set paramaters), for games it's pretty much limited to 'if x happens, do z'

arthurtuxedo · #7 September 20th, 2006, 11:07 PM

Quote:

StarShadow said:
In that case..what is the point of all the new diplomacy options, if the AI just ignores any that aren't part of a pre-defined package? I don't play multi-player, and even if I did, why should all the new functionality of diplomacy be reserved for multi-player?

What's the point of the new diplomacy options if the AI has no idea what it's asking for, and suggests treaties that are all over the map, and treaties which may greatly harm them? The ideal solution is, of course, "fix the AI", but we all know the chances of that. My solution would at least stop the AI from completely screwing itself over or proposing treaties that make no sense and rejecting ones that make perfect sense.

I say leave the complex mode for the multiplayer arena where it will do more good than harm.

StarShadow · #8 September 20th, 2006, 11:11 PM

I would say, take the middle road. Make diplomatic 'packages' for the AI to use, but don't restrict the player to using only those packages. Of course making the AI more savvy in diplomacy would be good too.

arthurtuxedo · #9 September 20th, 2006, 11:22 PM

You almost have to restrict the incoming treaties the AI will accept if you don't improve the AI. Otherwise, it would be trivially easy to get them to agree to treaties that are extremely harmful for them. I agree that your system would be a great improvment to the current alphabet soup, but it does leave open serious potential for exploitation.

StarShadow · #10 September 20th, 2006, 11:27 PM

Not really, just add conditions to AI acceptance. For example, make the AI not accept a treaty that disallows them to do research, UNLESS, the treaty also says the player will share their research with the AI. With the possibility of the AI accepting a no research treaty if the player is much, much stronger than them(intimidation factor).