The Key is to improve the AI . . .
. . . in as much as making the AI a more serious opponent is concerned.
Total agreement here...
Can both of you - or anyone else - be more specific? Feel free to send me an email - firstname.lastname@example.org
- and let me know what you think or post it here. In what ways would should the AI be improved? What is the first thing that should be improved? What is the next? Is the biggest issue AI tactics or how the AI runs the economy?
For me the AI's inability to be more pro-active in conducting diplomacy with the player is a huge failure. I hate comparisons, but at least the CIV series will show the computer players actively seeking negotiations beyond a simple counter-offer. BG, it would be a huge step forward if the AI would "understand" (if that is the correct terminology) its position vice that of the player and other AI countries and attempt to position itself diplomatically to improve itself. The game may already be doing this, however I cannot see it in the limited transactions that the AI completes with me as a player.
The AI's current failure to improve its country by means of R&D in the many available areas and lack of building additional R&D facilities.
The AI's failure to build additional facilities to improve itself.
The AI's failure to conduct better military operations be it offensive or defensive in terms of:
- airborne/air assault
- use of aircraft beyond defense only
- ability to conduct targeting and make attempts to destroy its chosen targets to limit its enemies ability to wage war
- better use of naval assets and utilize "power projection" with those forces by means of aircraft carriers, threat of amphibious landings, etc.
- Better protection of its critical facilities in times of elevated tensions and war.
- The understanding that it needs to rebuild destroyed facilities, military bases, etc.
- The actual loss of capabilities once facilities are destroyed to AFFECT the AI's ability to continue to build units and support current units.
- The ability of the AI to "understand" its technology shortcomings and seek countries with the knowledge.
- The ability to see its coming demise and make diplomatic attempts with the winning country (player or AI) to stop the war. If the AI would see that it cannot defend itself it should at least seek a ceasefire. If the winning AI/player country refuses then it should affect that countries CB with other nations.
- Allow the AI or player to give territory back to the original owner and it have a diplomatic meaning. When I take control of 50,000 sqkm of Syrian territory and then pull my troops back to Israeli territory and offer the land back to Syria - Syria should take the land. While a ceasefire or peace treaty may still not occur, it should still back the territory.
- The ability of the AI to understand its diplomatic position and it to maximize its role in the actions of a binding treaty - to include both the positive and negative affects of its actions.
- The ability of the AI to "Learn" the player and other AI countries actions so that it doesn't fall victim to the same tactics every time - either diplomatic or militarily. Allied countries would also have a sharing of knowledge to improve themselves against a common enemy country or enemy alliance.
There are probably more but I must go.
PS. Regardless BG, I am seriously looking forward to your next product and I continue to spread your name to everyone I know to hopefully improve your budget!