Some suggestions for improving SP (and perhaps to a lesser degree MP)

[tinkthank]

Hello there,

I'm probably one of the few people here who really enjoy SP games (because of odd work hours, family, etc.), although perhaps a poll might prove me wrong. In any case, here is a tiny list of things which might be helpful in improving SP games and, to a lesser degree, MP in the process as well. Please excuse me if the general consensus indicates that these things are just way too much worth for their effort, since I know nothing about programming.

1. A handicap setting. In "game setup" view, each nation can have a +/- 5-50 % setting in 5% increments (e.g. 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%...) which affects the global HPs of all those units of that nation, thus allowing one to set AI and human nations to be stronger or weaker. (This was implemented by the Blizzard game Warcraft III, which -- despite what you may think of that game -- worked fairly nicely.) Thus in SP, you could make yourself slightly more weaker tactically, or Ermor, or whatever. In MP, one could conceivably agree to give a "weaker" nation a mini-advantage of a "stronger" nation (I dont want to argue about what those could be here, I think the nations are very balanced in general), or a weaker player (me!) an edge-up vs. an experienced player (you!).
2. Strategic setting: Let the AI nations build fortresses. It seems they do not as of yet. I am sure there is a good reason for this, and perhaps the simple request "hey let there be an algorithm which lets them build fortresses" is probably very complex, but .... I think that would solve many problems. Now, I only have problems vs. Ermor, since they are basically the only nation that doesnt starve when on AI.
3. Strategic Setting: Let the AI nations have a higher interest in Gems. I dont think they search enough.
4. Strategic Setting: Let the AI nations have an interest in dispelling global enchantments. I don't see them doing this "enough". (I say "enough" because although I have not yet done a comprehensive systematic empirical check, I have yet to see an AI nation dispell one of my global enchantments, even the ones that hurt them badly (such as WoG or BoT.)

Well I suppose that "improving AI spellcasting" could also belong to this list, but I won't mention it here. (Argh: performative self-contradiction sorry.)

I know now that PBEM is the "main telos" (paraphrasing a wise person here, think it was Gandalf Parker), but it would be really excellent for weirdos like me who enjoy SP games to see more goodness.

[Taqwus]

1. Handicaps might be interesting.

Heck, the most obvious way to do this would be for the host / game setter-upper to specify how many design points each player gets (which would be made known to all players). Other modifiers might be interesting as well, but possibly harder (for instance, how does a global hp modifier interact with enslave/charming spells?).

Additional areas that shouldn't cause too much complexity later on would be starting gold, extra gems (e.g. X times initial gem income), extra troops (e.g. 1.5x starting).

In theory one could have a system in which design points get spent on advantages, but balancing would be enormously hard.


2. Algorithm problem, I think. Fortresses are mostly pretty expensive, and placement may be tricky (chokepoints? protecting certain magical sites? protecting researchers? high-resource areas? interesting indy troops?).

Starvation issues might be alleviated somewhat if it placed higher importance on nature magic / construction / supply items. A few Cauldrons of Broth or Summer Swords goes a long way.


3. Perhaps, hard to tell for me how much they're searching as I don't know the levels of the different magical sites. I wonder if it's using the divination spells.


4. I've seen 'em try, but not too often. They probably should more, although hm -- maybe it's considered futile if your gem income dwarfs theirs? Wouldn't know.

[Wauthan]

While your ideas are interesting Thinkthank I fear that they will be a lot easier to implement using mods and maps rather than changing the programming.

I've made some scenarious of my maps where I simply slap a fortress in various interesting places as well as putting in known sites. The independant forces must surely have a history in the province no? The AI makes good use of these things and creates a much more challanging game.

Try Gandalf Parkers "Poke in the Eye". There are fortresses in each and every province! You'll soon find yourself rasing castles just to keep them out of the hands of a rapidly growing enemy.

[tinkthank]

OK.
Taqwus, +/- gold and gems would be a neat idea too. Is all of this hard to do?
I think one could at least encourage the AI to build fortresses with a simple algorithm. Forget indy troops, bottlenecks, etc. for the time being and let the AI at least try to build 1 simply for the gold, the supply, and the chance to build more troops. I am sick of fighting starving AI troops!
But it seems this is hard to do. Thanks for informing me Wauthan about the difficulty in programming, I didnt know that. That is too bad, since I sort of like the maps and the unmodded games, but I will give it a whirl....