Phew,

the AI (playing the single player games) got really good. It will now distribute its income clever and divert reasonable forces onto different locations (not put all in one field), coordinate with other AIs and start supporting the AI at the front much faster rather than piling up huge force at the abandon points.
I also noticed that my luck got significantly worse. Sometimes I get -2.x luck when I have 1 or two more armies when defending, as a result I am left with much less armies than the AI after an attack.
It is still possible to win all single player challenges, just can't get anywhere near my best scores anymore.

Anyone else noticed the AI got better?

cheers

wilstedt

yeh, it started playing reinforcement cards in multiplayer games where it replaced booted or surrendered players. i'm losing a match i almost had won for this reason :'(

Hey guys,

last year i opened a threat and directly asked Fizzer, if he can tune the capabilities of an AI, because i experienced VERY differnt behavious of AI s in Europe map games i.e. compared to Asia map. I never got an answer but meanwhile i am convinced he has a set of AI s with different capabilities. This would not astonish me, because an AI complying to a rather small set of rules already could represent a quite good player. The AI i experienced in Europe map games always turned out to be dumber than dumb. In several Asia map games i could observe quite the contrary.

Cue a drone insisting that the AI couldn't have been altered since Fizzer said it would invalidate single-player records:

mosquitero you shouldnt threaten fizzer i dont think that would work very well

Threaten? A question as a threat? Like: Q: "Is the AI parametrizable" A: "HEY MAN, DONT THREATEN ME WITH SUCH A QUESTION OR I CALL THE COPS" :D

And who finds my typos may well keep em :D. ThreaD <--- :D

Really? Your allied AI still sucks in the Europe challenge.

for me AI still sucks

Agree, the max it ever does is make me take 1-3 turns less to win.

Frankly A1 are good to have on your team up to a certain point. Then you realize what they truly are; power obsessed, selfish and greedy computers. Attacking opponent? Only if they have to. Gift you territory or expand? You already know. Helpful to stop enemies? Only of they are really bad or other power hungry A1. And the list goes on and on.... I hope you are right, both A1 in Europe challenge are very dimwitted, it's just that the opponent A1 starts off better.

Personally, I think that there should be different difficulty settings for AI. That way, if one person wants them to be punching bags, and if another person wants them to actually fight well, we could avoid an argument.

"Personally, I think that there should be different difficulty settings for AI. That way, if one person wants them to be punching bags, and if another person wants them to actually fight well, we could avoid an argument."

I was thinking about that. The current AI could become easy mode, and our current level scores could simply be for that easy mode. No real changes made there. Advanced AIs could do things better, though naturally that requires better programming of AIs. This at least solves the whole "don't change the AI due to singleplayer scores".

No time to write a long reply:

- I highly doubt the AI changed (Fizzer would surely have mentioned something like that in the update notes).
- It's a known fact (stated by Fizzer on multiple occasions) that the AI is partly randomized. Whether that is up to the point of "different personalities" I don't know (kinda doubt it, but not sure).

what if ais are people


and they're forced to play warlight.....

lol arun good point

RvW, thanks for your reply giving me a bit more insight why AI s behave differently. A "partly randomized" AI sure could be an explanation. If for example there is an AI behavior-related parameter like "aggressive/defense" ratio, that is randomized.

I just wish the AI paid more attention to bonus areas. We are playing a game on Europe map (AI took over for booted player). It had all of Germany for 3-4 turns except one spot (controlled by human with 5-6 armies) and it thew all it's armies into taking random countries that don't contribute to bonuses.

It seems like it just expands randomly.

Chris, was that an ally or not? AIs seem to be completely ignoring allied territories, whether they complete bonuses or not. The advantage is that you'll be able to take control of a bonus when your allied AI controls some territories. The disadvantage is that it will think as such even when it requires only one more territory.

If it was an opponent, it depends on how much income the AI has. If it can't defeat the opponent with a single turn of income, it will spend its income on the second-most important place (and completely ignore the first). At least, I think that's how it works, noting experience as a source.

Chris,

The AI (usually) favours expanding over fighting other players.

The AI does (under certain conditions) complete bonuses by taking over territories from team mates. While there doesn't seem to be a way to force it to do so, the following are some things to keep in mind:

• It will only do so when it has at least half of all the bonuses in a territory (this was stated by Fizzer)
• It will only start taking over territories from team mates when each territory in the bonus is controlled by their team
• Having only a single defender seems to greatly increase the AI's willingness to attack
• The AI does not seem to consider completing bonuses a very high priority; if it can find another use for its armies elsewhere on the map, it will often do so