Once again, I understand that the player cheats due to difference of intellectual aptitude, meaning that giving the AI buffs is a balancing factor, but if there is a possibility to decrease that difference rather than come up with ways of destroying more braindead units, I am going to pick the former 100% of the timeĪI is an extremely important feature. In a strategy game, I want to lose because I was outsmarted, not because the AI managed to bring an extra stack of units it's just gonna charge against my lines because it is not under the same economic confines. If the AI can't handle sieges, then don't do complicated sieges, absolutelyīut yes, I definitely want better AI and all the implications that entails. However, I also believe CA should work within the confines of what is possible. I have been defending CA's AI fo ages because compared to AI from other games, especially rts games, it is pretty damn good. Those efforts are better put into some other, actual features. There is issue of cost to implement, the performance issue and the issue that it would make game unplayable for most people. Making AI for these games isn't as simple as you seem to think.Īnd you think you want good AI, but you don't really. Originally posted by THEDOSSBOSS:If the AI aren't improved along with it, CA could make siege maps as impressive as Thrones', and it wouldn't mean a damn thing
0 kommentar(er)
