kaspergm
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 5,577
The huge problem that always comes up with these things, and what people don't always take into consideration, is how do you code it. There are a lot of good suggestions in this thread, but how do we actually put it into a meaningful code? We also need to remember that even if we get a code that makes the AI do meaningful actions 90 % of the time, the human player will exploit those final 10 %.This makes a lot of sense! Wish they could alter the AI to focus on weighting small scale battles along with the global scale so the AI could compete better. If I'm going turtle and just defending my borders, it usually doesn't matter what the AI shoots at me (as long as they are not a lot further up the tech tree). I can defend, hit, swap, heal my way to not even allowing them to cross my border. And I'm not an advocate of going backwards and allowing multiple units per tile, but this is because of 1 UPT that it is so much easier to defend your borders. IMHO, it is a lot more fun with the Chess-like experience with 1UPT, but along with 1UPT, they need to ensure the AI knows how to properly use the terrain and 1UPT to stay competitve.
Anyway, as to the thing with local combat progress, something one could introduce is a check for a combat strength evolution on a turn-by-turn basis when AI is in combat. For instance, if they are engaged in a combat situation with me, and my combat strength is constant over time (i.e. I don't lose any units), this should trigger some sort of check. It should be possible to code such a check fairly easily, and if for instance AI hasn't been able to reduce my army strength and unit numbers significantly over, say, a 5 turn period, it should reconsider whether combat is the correct way to proceed, instead of just mindlessly continuing to pile units at me.