New patch and multiplayer map pack

[JCrowe]

.... naturally, all of this depends on an AI capable of making rational choices. AI v1.05 is a huge step up from its predecessor, but it's still a major lightweight.

It builds air units, but seems to limit itself to one air attack action per turn. (Fighter can move 4 spaces and engage enemy forces in at least three nearby, but only hits one before returning home for the remainder of the turn.)

It builds naval task forces, but limits itself to one unit of each type, and NEVER builds carriers (jet or helo).

It puts a HUGE priority on building these naval task forces, pushing money into them one-ship-at-a-time if necessary, even when all hell is breaking loose as enemy forces invade or shoot those ships to pieces without effort. (Suicidal myopia.)

It builds ASW Choppers, but sends them to fight land battles, never against subs.

It builds AA Trucks and the occassional AA Emplacement for territorial defence, but it won't spend big on those units and rush them to the front when unfriendly bombers and jets start taking names and knockin' on doors.

It takes a very relaxed approach to territorial acquisition, even when neutrals are absent.

It seems to obsess over worthless territories it loses to other AI teams, even as your own forces are crushing it like a ripe grape.

It seems to limit itself to one attack per turn, and will deploy insane amounts of firepower to prosecute that attack.

For example, weenie-burger AI Green Team seizes unguarded land worth 4 Resource Points from AI Blue Team using one Infantry unit. Blue responds immediately with 3 Regular Bombers, 1 Stealth Bomber, 2 Stealth Fighters, 2 Regular Fighters, 4 Tanks, 2 Rocket Artillery, and a Bosch Kitchen Sink (stainless steel). Blue COMPLETELY ignores the dozens of tanks, fighters, and bombers that Red / Human team is assembling on its border - a border already made out of previously-Blue territories. Eh? See what happens when you contract your military leadership to Lindsay Lohan & Britney Spears?

This is just a sampler of the issues I'm seeing with v1.05. Anyone else noting other contra-intelligent design by the AI?

[Skirmisher]

My own thinking is you allocate forces for offense and defense.

If an opponent does the unthinkable and wipes out your attacking forces,you still have your defensive forces.

Everyone seems to be overlooking nuclear weapons. They clear off enemy lands in a heartbeat.

Infantry seems near worthless. They don't seem to be able to kill anything.

I noticed that when you build fortified position, the AI seems to avoid them.

The new demo is improved though, at least it's fairly fun to play at this point.

[Uncle_Joe]

Yes, I doubled the hit points of Infantry and that at least makes them useful to soak up attacks. They are also fairly versatile as they get 100% vs Land and 80% vs Air (although their basic attack damage is weak).

Infantry's problems are they they are slow and that have a 50% upkeep (compared to ~25% upkeep on other units). But with the doubled HPs they provide a need amount of beef to a force. I also buffed up the attack values on the APCs a bit (more to represent BMPs and Bradley's more than BTRs or M113's). This also makes infantry a bit more attractive to use since it helps remove the major penalty of slow movement. A stack of 5 APCs carrying 10 double-HP infantry is actually a fairly respectable force.

But yeah, in the standard rules I dont know why you'd ever bother with Infantry or APCs or Fortified Positions....

[Skirmisher]

What would be neat if say infantry was required to take over enemy structures. That way at least there would be a need for them.

[Skirmisher]

Originally Posted by Uncle_Joe

But yeah, in the standard rules I dont know why you'd ever bother with Infantry or APCs or Fortified Positions....

What rules are you using?

[Uncle_Joe]

I created a quick mod using ScottWAR's mod as a base.

I basically rebalanced the costs and capabilities a bit on certain units to make some more playable and others less dominant.

[Uncle_Joe]

OK, after playing a bit more into it, the AI is definitely still pretty brain-dead lol. I don't think it's anything that can't be fixed, but at this point it's just killing itself.

And honestly there are a few game rules changes that could be implemented that would help while not really hurting the game IMO.

Some suggestions:

1) You should not be able to build in just captured Facilities. It makes it too easy to steam-roller an opponent (human or AI for that matter) since you can attack, take their production site and then immediately dump as many units as you want into it.

2) Units should probably only be able to engage in COMBAT once per turn. Again, the AI is not good at doing multiple attacks in a turn and it also causes steam-roller effects. Mobile units are already incredibly good. They really dont need the added bonus of being able to stomp into multiple battles.

3) The whole 'capturing' nukes/neutron bombs etc and being able to use them immediately on the same turn...I mean...really? That is just beyond cruel. And its even worse for the AI since it never seems to actually USE the damned thing in the first play (but it loves to build them to hand over to you and get nuked by their own weapons!).

Beyond that, the AIs really need to be taught:

1) To mass units. Having 1-3 Infantry isnt worthwhile, but having 10-12 is. Unfortunately I never see the AI massing units. It usually just creates a few more expensive units that die and leave it with nothing.

2) To not walk blindly forward into enemy fire, especially when it has either a range advantage or it is on the defense (meaning that the attacker should have to commit first). This change alone would make the game MUCH harder since the AI might actually KILL something once in a while. If it's not possible to do this, then bite the bullet and change the game so that you fire after you move (even if with a penalty). It does no good to have game rules in place that simply allow simple exploiting of the AI in every battle.

Finally, I would suggest adding in alternate victory conditions so it's possible to 'win' within grinding out every pointless territory. You should be able to configure a win on 'x' percent of the territories and you should definitely win by simply defeating all opponents (NOT every silly neutral in the game).

All in all, this game has a fun and addictive quality to it but even in the patched state, it's just not really worth playing against an AI that is that terrible with game rules that just magnify the weaknesses of the AI. But with a few tweaks to the AI and the rules, this game will be real gem IMO!

[Skirmisher]

All good points.

Most of the FAB plants I have in my current game the AI built for me ,lol.

Have you been nuked yet?

I saw a ballistic sub but it didn't fire at me,meanwhile I'm shooting off nukes every turn and serilizing the map.

Whats the deal when you build a nutron bomb and you see it sitting in a territory? how do you use it?

The AI became only marginally better overall with the patch.

Multiplayer is currently untenable so the near future outlook is somewhat grim, having just purchased the game.

[ScottWAR]

Agreed,...all excellent points by Uncle Joe.

Not nearly as important but some things I would like to see added-

More control over what kind of map that is generated,....for example being able to select whether there is one big continent or a few small continents or a bunch of little islands,....etc.

A guide for making mods......what is possible to do and how do you do it?

[spillblood]

Originally Posted by ScottWAR

A retreat option would indeed solve the problem. For the attacker only.

No, I think defenders should also be able to retreat resulting in immediate victory for the attacker. That would make it possible to mass your forces in rear territories. But it should only be possible when there are adjacent own territories.