When you play the game a while you see the A.I has not been taught how the play the game.Most late games the A.I does not even have trading up and running.It has no clue about diplomacy and the player is the one manipulating the political system.Amp just seem to think adding massive bonus is the answer rather than coding the A.I how to play.



Civ5 has much better A.I.

Apocalypse wrote:
You played the guys build around expansion and domination victory,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEd6JNeFfTQ



So yeah the crave… necrophages are that race.

Apocalypse wrote:
You played the guys build around expansion and domination victory, while the Mezari/Vaulters are built more around science and defense.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=46&v=-fWNAx2MO6U

Ok, fair enough. What race do you think is best suited to win a supremecy-only victory? I played as the Necrophages. Got a feeling these guys may be one of them. Can't help but wonder if that Battle Born ability is a bit OP.

MrChoke wrote:
Of course people don't want to lose every game. I never would say let's get rid of easy mode or even normal mode. But when you play a given skill level and the AI is incapable of beating you unless you give it the option to number crunch you with city management efficiency that is a fail.



As stated I am new to this game. If you think race matters in this regard ok. I was playing Necrophages. The turtling AI was the Mezari. Do you think that made a difference somehow?

You played the guys build around expansion and domination victory, while the Mezari/Vaulters are built more around science and defense.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=46&v=-fWNAx2MO6U

Apocalypse wrote:
In most games the garbage Ai is there intentionally. Players don´t like to get outsmarted by their computers, the goal of a gaming AI is always to lose the game. On top of that using normal as reference is kind of silly. And not giving the race of your opponents AIs is even more silly, because indeed a lot of the races are not build for a supremacy victory. If you take away the victory conditions which their alignment is build for thae you for sure will have a bad AI. Try a few necrophages as opponents if you want a purely military game.

Of course people don't want to lose every game. I never would say let's get rid of easy mode or even normal mode. But when you play a given skill level and the AI is incapable of beating you unless you give it the option to number crunch you with city management efficiency that is a fail.



As stated I am new to this game. If you think race matters in this regard ok. I was playing Necrophages. The turtling AI was the Mezari. Do you think that made a difference somehow?

drew4321 wrote:
I think you are failing to understand a few things. First of all yes, for a strategy game such as this were there are SO many decisions to make it is very hard for an AI to constantly weigh all its options like a human would all in a small amount of time. And for the developers to implement ONE series of commands for an AI to follow is already difficult, so to make them "smarter" for each difficulty would mean to make a whole new series of commands for EACH difficulty, so the only realistic solution is to try best to make the AI act as "human" as possible and give them different amount of bonus to make them more difficult. And there is nothing wrong with that. What's the difference between facing someone who uses a medium amount of resources to get a medium output to someone who gets a small amount of resources to get a medium output? As the human YOUR experience is the same, so saying harder is cheating is simply not the way to approach AI. Also, I may add that "normal" really still serves as an easy mode, as it is intended to be for people who have played strategy games but need to get a feel without being overwhelmed IMO. So, try harder difficulties because this game is amazing and see if the challenge is more to your liking before putting weird principles in place to avoid it.

I do not agree that the experience for the human player is the same if they get more resources. If you have any other victory conditions active, science victory, score, economic etc..., a higher level AI will destroy you with neck breaking efficiency and bonuses. You truly do have to be a master to win. But tell me this, what will the AI with the "supremacy-only" challenge do at higher levels? I am a newbie to this game. He was kicking my a$$ with his economy and military but did that make him smart enough to attack me? No. Will having an army size 4 times bigger than that because he is a higher (cheating) skill level, you tell me. What he still turtle?



If you say normal is semi-easy mode, I am willing to go up one level and play again. But if this level is so high that it would be impossible for me to win with any other victory condition because of his advantages, I won't play it.

Maverik wrote:
I do not think the solution is multiplayer for all, play multiplayer requires rules that not everyone is willing to take (fast speed, aggressive games, many time limitations, auto resolve battles, personally I do not enjoy the game with these rules).



To the OP I would tell him of give an opportunity to higher difficulties, it is true that AI is cheating and not good but if you increase one or two levels really makes the game more challenging and until impossible the cheats are not abusive.



It's hard to enjoy any 4X if you do not admit some tricks in the IA



Also I have good news, the dev team is preparing improvements for AI already, I hope we can see soon and be a significant change.



/#/endless-legend/forum/5-general/thread/2890-your-feedback-on-ai

You are correct, I do not play a game like this multiplayer. I think there are a lot of people who only play 4X strategy single player.



I did see that very long thread on the AI. The game is definitely worth waiting for and seeing what the next patch does for the AI. But when will it come out? This game is over a year old now.

MrChoke wrote:
So I am quitting my 1st full Endless Legend game at turn 340. Just like Civilization 5 and every other turn-based strategy game I have ever played, the AI is incapable of executing a militaristic victory. How to prove this is simple. Just set the only active victory condition to supremacy. In this game I trailed in every category especially military strength to the leading AI. It took out another AI opponent early game, as did I. Then what did it do? It turtled of course. Sure it pillaged some of my resources until we traded closed borders but that was it. I went to turn 340, waiting for this joke of an AI to stop turtling and achieve the victory condition and it did nothing. They never do.



So your 1st question may be, what skill was I playing? It was normal. I don't like cheating AIs. But to be honest I doubt with only this victory condition active that it matters. Unless someone can tell me this AI is "smarter" on higher levels. I doubt it. They always get bonuses that you don't and with it comes the difficulty because game developers can always program an efficient AI. An AI that can manage cities second to none. But this is a strategy game right? Can they ever make an AI use strategy to actually attack and defeat the human player by more than ridiculous bonuses and flawless efficiencies? I have yet to see it.



By turn 340 I was starting to see that by me just hitting end turn over and over again and doing nothing but keep my cities building something (not even military, just buildings), I was slowly gaining ground on this turtling worthless AI. I could go 300 more turns and it would still be doing this.



I quit CIV 5 for this exact same reason. But I tell you what, this was especially bad and inept. Amplitude needed to do better than this. I wish I could get e refund. What a waste of such a beautiful, innovative game, with so many neat concepts. Only to throw it all away with garbage AI. Really too bad.

In most games the garbage Ai is there intentionally. Players don´t like to get outsmarted by their computers, the goal of a gaming AI is always to lose the game. On top of that using normal as reference is kind of silly. And not giving the race of your opponents AIs is even more silly, because indeed a lot of the races are not build for a supremacy victory. If you take away the victory conditions which their alignment is build for thae you for sure will have a bad AI. Try a few necrophages as opponents if you want a purely military game.

I think you are failing to understand a few things. First of all yes, for a strategy game such as this were there are SO many decisions to make it is very hard for an AI to constantly weigh all its options like a human would all in a small amount of time. And for the developers to implement ONE series of commands for an AI to follow is already difficult, so to make them "smarter" for each difficulty would mean to make a whole new series of commands for EACH difficulty, so the only realistic solution is to try best to make the AI act as "human" as possible and give them different amount of bonus to make them more difficult. And there is nothing wrong with that. What's the difference between facing someone who uses a medium amount of resources to get a medium output to someone who gets a small amount of resources to get a medium output? As the human YOUR experience is the same, so saying harder is cheating is simply not the way to approach AI. Also, I may add that "normal" really still serves as an easy mode, as it is intended to be for people who have played strategy games but need to get a feel without being overwhelmed IMO. So, try harder difficulties because this game is amazing and see if the challenge is more to your liking before putting weird principles in place to avoid it.

I do not think the solution is multiplayer for all, play multiplayer requires rules that not everyone is willing to take (fast speed, aggressive games, many time limitations, auto resolve battles, personally I do not enjoy the game with these rules).



To the OP I would tell him of give an opportunity to higher difficulties, it is true that AI is cheating and not good but if you increase one or two levels really makes the game more challenging and until impossible the cheats are not abusive.



It's hard to enjoy any 4X if you do not admit some tricks in the IA



Also I have good news, the dev team is preparing improvements for AI already, I hope we can see soon and be a significant change.



/#/endless-legend/forum/5-general/thread/2890-your-feedback-on-ai

Unlike Civ5, though, Endless Legend has a very accessible Multiplayer mode in which you can face people with actual abilities and a plan to victory. You should totally try that before giving up on EL as a bad game, it is imo focused on the Multiplayer experience, again, unlike civ5.



Steam is brunopradosantos1 (im pretty sure), feel free to add so we can play. Check out Endless Legend Multiplayer group on steam too.