Does "AI No Building Requirement" improves gameplay?

[marioflag]

For anyone who has already tried to play with "AI no building requirement":
-Has this option improved the gameplay in your games?
-Has anyone noticed if this option messes up AI?
-Is it better to use this option or simply use an higher level of difficulty?

 

[woodelf]

It makes the game much more challenging. You now have to take cities defended by archers and will see Axemen rushing you. No more warriors and scouts in turn 300...

Much better.

And just playing a higher diff won't change the fact that the AI doesn't built good units, just the tech rates, maintenance, ect.

 

[felwar]

Actually I've been playing without this and seeing lots of axemen and cavalry from the AI. It would definitely make it more challenging, but they seem to be doing pretty well on their own.

 

[galahadba]

Well i cant compare, as i always play with this option

But, yes, the ai always have good units to defend/atack, the last game i lost with the calabim becouse i was rushed by the orcs with lots of worg riders + Axemans + Catapults... and their leader

 

[Seidrik_The_Gray]

Honestly, why not remove the building requirements all together, just make them give you extra XP or a special promo for a new unit built there.

 

[galahadba]

Honestly, why not remove the building requirements all together, just make them give you extra XP or a special promo for a new unit built there.

Actually i like this system, the problem is that the AI is yet to be worked in other phases of the project, so while it is not, we can simply use the option and be happy

 

[xienwolf]

The reason they leave the buildings as required instead of just improving units built is so that you have to carefully plan what each city will build and work towards that goal. You cannot just capture a new city and instantly start to churn out your strongest unit, that unit must walk across your empire from the one city that you have set up to produce them. Or you have to sacrafice production time in multiple cities in order to have more than 1 source for that unit.

 

[woodelf]

So far this is a good compromise for player vs AI. I've noticed much more competitive gaming and unit decision making from the AI.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I still think the unit-enabling buildings should be made intrinsically better rather than letting the AI cheat by ignoring the buildings. I think FfH could actually use more buildings, but none of them should have its only ability be that it makes a unit, building,or wonder available.

I haven't actually tried this option yet.

 

[Bitwise]

I still think the unit-enabling buildings should be made intrinsically better rather than letting the AI cheat by ignoring the buildings. I think FfH could actually use more buildings, but none of them should have its only ability be that it makes a unit, building,or wonder available.

I haven't actually tried this option yet.

Man, I agree. I hate building a building just to get access to one unit, that's irritating.

 

[onedreamer]

My question is, since I read in the changelog that the AI was made aware of how to use these buildings, why is this option necessary ? Is the AI aware of how to use them or not ?

 

[[NWO]_Valis]

I suppose it is aware but it doesn't think of it much.

Playing without that option and on turn 245/monarch the AI is using mostly warriors. Lately I saw hunters but I already have Ghosts, axmen and priesthod. I saw also lots of soldiers of kilmorph from my Khazad neighbours.

 

[onedreamer]

shouldn't have trusted the changelog, now I gotta restart my game >_<

 

[Seidrik_The_Gray]

I guess I'm the type of player that just builds an unstoppable army and then marches through your empire at will. Perhaps if I used an early war strategy, I might see more use for the buildings.

At any rate, I will now make sure this option is always on. Only time I've seen good or well decent unit usage was on an Emperor game.

 

[Kael]

My question is, since I read in the changelog that the AI was made aware of how to use these buildings, why is this option necessary ? Is the AI aware of how to use them or not ?

It does value the unit creating buildings much better than prior versions. But there is a big difference between valuing them, and essentially getting their bonus for free.

There is a lot of things the AI is working on doing, just like a human player, it considers the growth needs of its citieis, culture building, infrastrusture effects like increasing reserach, production or gold. That along with trying to build an occasional wonder and keeping and updated army in the field. So even though the AI now knows that the units enabling buildings are good, it still has to balance thier value out with everything else it wants to do.

As a developer thats a very thin line to walk. It would be easy to push the unit enabling buildings so strongly that the AI would build nothing else, but that is just as bad a strategy as never building them. The trick is to find an appropriate weighting, we made a big step forward in 0.30, but it can definitly get even better.

So it is a nice cheat for the AI and for players that want an additional challenge. Its not much different than simply raising the difficulty slider, but its just an additional option for players. And you know how we love options

 

[onedreamer]

makes more sense now, thanks Kael.

 

[MetalMilitia-]

My last game definately saw more of those pesky assassins, lost a lot of mages that way, because i was being careless with them mostly. Still never saw the calabim build Morois or wampires.

 

[Basil II]

I would venture to say that mapsize/size of the AI kingdoms is a factor here too. An AI nation with 10-12 cities in my experience is more likely to field a balanced force as they have had a chance to build some different buildings more than a 3-4 city kingdom...