Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
SlyFrog
May 16, 2007

What? One name? Who are you, Seal?
I just want a modern Rise of Nations with a big enough player base for it to not be 100% random games against diehards with 10,000 games played.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

SlyFrog
May 16, 2007

What? One name? Who are you, Seal?

Love Stole the Day posted:

That's one of those chicken and egg scenarios: only a moron would invest thousands of hours into a project that nobody will play, but nobody will support such a project unless it already has a bunch of people excited for it. Nobody wants to be first, nobody wants to be last, and nobody will give a poo poo unless it's good enough.

Yeah. So many games feel like they fell into that camp historically. Good games, probably better than some more popular games, but no one wants to play a "dead" game so everyone just kept playing the more populated game.

SlyFrog
May 16, 2007

What? One name? Who are you, Seal?
Playing an RTS (or almost any similar multiplayer game) online rapidly stops feeling like playing the theme of the game, and more about just memorizing and trying to be faster/better at executing whatever strategy happens to be OP at the moment.

I've so found the matchmaking usually blows, and games seem to alternate between mauling someone and the being crushed by someone who is smurfing.

But basically, my online RTS experiences have always been things like, "Ostwind spam!"

I'm not playing a WWII game to see who can get out their OP unit and spam it the fastest based on a memorized build order. That's not remotely fun for me.

SlyFrog
May 16, 2007

What? One name? Who are you, Seal?
Is Northgard the one where the AI doesn't even remotely play by the same rules, and basically just gets whatever cheats are needed and full vision, everything else? Like it's not even playing the same game?

SlyFrog
May 16, 2007

What? One name? Who are you, Seal?

Yngwie Mangosteen posted:

I don't need the AI to be playing the same game that I'm playing, but I should be able to have levers to affect it that make logical sense to me. If the AI has endless gold, then I can't ruin their economy, or I need the ways I have to try and ruin their economy to set them back in a manner that makes sense. If the AI isn't limited in terms of unit production the same way that I am, I still need a lever to gently caress with their ability to field a full army every turn, etc.

It's a tricky problem.

This is the issue. There is "cheating," and then there is the AI not even really playing the game.

It's like Anno 1800, where literally the AI is just a fake screen. Resources, etc. don't matter to it - it just puts buildings on the islands over time without regard to what you are doing to it, blockades, resource starvation, etc.

Imagine a game of chess where you take pieces and the AI just randomly puts more pieces on the board on its side.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

SlyFrog
May 16, 2007

What? One name? Who are you, Seal?

doctorfrog posted:

The premise of most 4X's is bullshit anyway: "everyone starts on the same even footing at the same time and the cleverest wins!" Just like human history!

This is part of why I really like AI Wars/AI Wars 2.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply