No more MP for Hinnom? - Page 12

HoneyBadger · #1 October 5th, 2008, 03:36 AM

What Gandalf means, I think, is that there's an MP element to the game, and a (badly neglected) SP element, and they don't work the same way at all. I personally think we need atleast 1 version of each Nation for SP, and atleast 1 version of each Nation for MP. Probably more than one.

JimMorrison · #2 October 5th, 2008, 04:08 AM

Also, if on harder difficulties many people are already seeing Hinnom fumbling around in SP, then "tuning" them with even subtle nerfs intended for MP, may just compound that problem. Of course, I'm having trouble figuring out what might be different about them, that the AI underperforms even against itself. (I'd like to note, many of my recent test games, Hinnom or Ashdod take off like crazy.) I'd be willing to bet it has to do with the AI's propensity for cheap indie troops though, as Hinnom's strength is based off of their incredible national troops (and if they lag in castles, that will have the obvious effect on that).

Sombre · #3 October 5th, 2008, 05:52 AM

No I played with Hinnom on a No Indies map and they still got tooled by the other AIs.

I think the best AI nation barring UW or LA Ermor is EA Ulm. It seems to do well every time.

In terms of balancing, you can't worry too much about SP and the AI, because the AI doesn't use the nations as they are supposed to be used anyway. Despite them having awesome PD and a strong starting force, the sort of things the AI can use well, they still don't do great. I don't really understand why though.

Edratman · #4 October 5th, 2008, 06:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sombre

No I played with Hinnom on a No Indies map and they still got tooled by the other AIs.

I think the best AI nation barring UW or LA Ermor is EA Ulm. It seems to do well every time.

In terms of balancing, you can't worry too much about SP and the AI, because the AI doesn't use the nations as they are supposed to be used anyway. Despite them having awesome PD and a strong starting force, the sort of things the AI can use well, they still don't do great. I don't really understand why though.

Based on limited observation, the AI Hinnom perfers to recruit the first 4 troops on the recruit screen. I theorize it is because these unit require lower gold/resources and it allows a larger quantity of unit recuits each turn.

You just never see AI Hinnom use chariots, for example. And you never see AI Caelum massing Mammoths for the same computer logic.

And EA ULM does well because the gold/resource costs of all its troops are approximately the same (slightly higher for best unit), so they do not have a precipitious drop off in unit quality when the computer chooses quantity over quality.

Using the Improved Computer Opponents mod you will see Caelum armies with 20 Mammoths, only because of restricted choice. Based on this thread, I'll add Hinnom and post it tonight.

Epaminondas · #5 October 5th, 2008, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edratman

Based on limited observation, the AI Hinnom perfers to recruit the first 4 troops on the recruit screen. I theorize it is because these unit require lower gold/resources and it allows a larger quantity of unit recuits each turn.

You just never see AI Hinnom use chariots, for example. And you never see AI Caelum massing Mammoths for the same computer logic.

I think you've nailed the problem on its head.

vfb · #6 October 5th, 2008, 07:16 AM

Wow, I think you are onto something! Your explanation fits well with the massive armies of Marverni Horn Blowers the AI loves to parade around.

Edratman · #7 October 5th, 2008, 09:34 AM

Thank you both.

For additional confirmation try the existing EA or MA Improved Computer Opponents mods.

I've run some quick tests with Hinnom and determined balancing the changes will take some time. I had a similar problem with EA Argatha. In nations where the top end recruitables are vastly stronger than the rest I've found getting a balanced boost is more difficult.

Gandalf Parker · #8 October 5th, 2008, 10:36 AM

Ive seen many suggestions for MP which would break AI or break the enjoyment of playing a nation in solo games. Ive also seen suggestions for AI or SP which would break MP etc etc.

I dont think that SP has been ignored by the Devs. In fact I think that many of the recent additions to the game are pro-SP and possibly damaging to MP. But the impression of nelect towards SP does exist in the forums. Thats understandable though. The MPers need to hang around more to get games, and need to create logins. The statistics on sales and on forum use (anonymous readers tend to outnumber registered by 200% in the forum at any time) it appears that there are many many SPers who just come for quick answers

HoneyBadger · #9 October 5th, 2008, 12:08 PM

That may be the case, Gandalf, but I don't think the game was ever built with SP in mind-and without a more powerful AI, it's hard to shoehorn in strong solutions, although I'm confident the Devs *do* try, they've been very attentive to our needs and desires, within the constraints of their limited time.

Tifone · #10 October 5th, 2008, 01:44 PM

I always found SP very entertaining. Now that I'm playing even MP I find it of course much more interesting, with diplomacy and everything - yet I'm always gonna play SP too and every improvement in this, is welcome