GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.

Emperor Zodd · #1 December 8th, 2001, 01:05 AM

How much better will the new A.I. in the GOLD EDITION be compared to the old A.I. from se4?

Also, will the problems with sats and fighters finally be fixed in the gold edition?

Aub · #2 December 8th, 2001, 02:29 AM

Yes, sats and fighters. Can we have them in Groups when they are launched form a planet or a carrier?

There is a way to group your fighters the way you want (using fleets), but it's extremely cumbersome. As for sats, there is no way. AS a result, sats over planets are pretty useless - they just may appear on the wrong side...

Is it a difficult code change? Now that with the Gold edition you've sold your soul -- we are paying, and want to get a new game's worth of features in return...

[ 08 December 2001: Message edited by: Aub ]

Baron Munchausen · #3 December 8th, 2001, 06:57 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Emperor Zodd:
How much better will the new A.I. in the GOLD EDITION be compared to the old A.I. from se4?

Also, will the problems with sats and fighters finally be fixed in the gold edition?

As with everything else, it's an incremental improvement, not some 'revolutionary' new thing. Yes, the AI is a bit smarter about some things, and some mistakes have been corrected. But it will still completely forget that it ever had a claim to a system once you wipe out its colonies. And it will still send fleets yoyoing back & forth across it's empire as it's priorities change from one turn to another, resulting in no attacks against any of the several threats it cannot decide amongst.

Q · #4 December 8th, 2001, 08:28 AM

What is the problem with fighters?

Emperor Zodd · #5 December 8th, 2001, 09:20 AM

Sats should deploy equally around a planet and if we can fly fighters around a sector like a ship can, than so should the A.I.

Mephisto · #6 December 8th, 2001, 12:03 PM

Satellites have increased range added with their mounts, and weapon platforms, too. Beware of a large weapon platform that can hit you 14 square away.
MM has fixed the kaimkaze, troop and boarding ships not searching for fleets. As we modders now can finally use these ships in attack fleets as special ships, be prepared to meet some new challenges like AI supply ships, AI point defense ships, AI planetary napalm bombers, anything our mad minds can think of.

Resident Alien 2 · #7 December 9th, 2001, 03:16 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:

.... But it will still completely forget that it ever had a claim to a system once you wipe out its colonies. And it will still send fleets yoyoing back & forth across it's empire as it's priorities change from one turn to another, resulting in no attacks against any of the several threats it cannot decide amongst.

I have recently being playing some Europa Universalis. That game has the concept of the "core province" marker (a shield that appears on the political map). They mark the historic full extent of a country, not it's actualy current borders. They can also be added to and subtracted from by triggered or random events in the game.

For example take Russia in 1792. There are a lot of core province markers owned by other countries: Poland in the west, various Khanates in the east and south.

The Russian AI is always working towards acquiring all provinces marked as its "core". Therefore the AI maintains it's focus across decades of game time and multiple wars of expansion.

In SE4 terms any system where an AI has or had a colony would be marked with a "Core System" flag. There after if the AI lost a system it would remember and try to reclaim it.

In fact the claim system marker could be used for this purpose and the more agressive AI's could push their core system claims to the max.

[ 09 December 2001: Message edited by: Resident Alien 2 ]

Beck · #8 December 9th, 2001, 05:06 PM

There is already a form of this at work in the game as the AI will claim all systems adjacent to one in which it has colonies. The problem the Baron was alluding to is the lack of memory from turn to turn. EU being a RTS has more continuity since it doesn't have an "end of turn". Using your example, SE4's problem is akin to in EU of Russia sending an army against Poland and then at some point forgetting it was at war with it and then sending it against the Khanates. Whatever decisions are made on turn x are not carried through to turns y+. So frequently the AI will decide to launch a massive invasion to reclaim a system to only have the fleet arrive and "forget" why it was sent, leaving without doing anything. Any particular course of action that cannot be completed in a single turn are subject to being over-ruled in later turns, even when no compelling reason can be shown for the change.

jowe01 · #9 December 10th, 2001, 12:20 PM

Shouldn't the Gold edition fix these shortcomings ? They are serious drawbacks,not minor details. I realize that this would mean investing some more time into the code, but hey, we are paying a good part of the price for a completely new game for the Gold edition. I realize that in order to support Aaron's/Shrapnel's good work, some people would buy SE4 Gold even if it only consisted of SE4 1.0 with a new sticker on the "manual". However, I think that in order to be a success, there has to be some real value-added. After an initial wave of "freak-purchases", you can only sell more if people feel that they receive something in return for their money. IMHO, you cannot hide from the customer base as a whole that so far the "Gold Edition" offers one of the least "bang for your buck" of all add-ons which I have ever seen from any gaming company (basically only the TCP/IP support is worth mentioning).

Now hammer me, but I would actually recommend to anyone to withhold your pre-orders until it becomes clear that the AI really gets beefed up in SE4 Gold. Not that Aaron/Shrapnell would not merit making some more money for the good support which they have offered so far. On the game which I have bought in November 2000 they have offered very good value for money. However, what I have seen in terms of new features in SE4 Gold simply is not worth another 35 $ plus expedition fees.

Please, please, Malfaldor, do yourself a favor and start seriously tackling all the bad AI shortcomings. If not, just offer a 10 $ download, that would be fair.

[ 10 December 2001: Message edited by: jowe01 ]

DirectorTsaarx · #10 December 10th, 2001, 06:46 PM

Just to add my opinion about "Gold" editions:

I was reading one of my computer gaming mags over the weekend, and there were a couple articles dedicated to "Gold" editions of a variety of games. Some Gold editions were nothing more than a collection of user mods, some were just a collections of different Versions of the game (like Quake and Quake II), some were patch collections, some included new levels/missions and some actually added new features. Oh, and the prices ranged from $15 to $50. So, as near as I can tell, SEIV:G is a typical Gold edition of a computer game. It includes a collection of user mods(in a convenient package, plus a mod picker), some new features (both TCP/IP and drones), new systems (SEIV Version of levels, kind of) and some bugfixes/patches. The only thing missing is a copy of SE2 and/or SE3 (like we'd need either of those). All for $35, just slightly more than the average price for other "Gold" edition games. My only complaint is that the SEIV:G "meets expectations" for a Gold edition of a game, rather than "exceeding expectations" as MM & Shrapnel usually do.