Suis3i wrote:

lakp wrote:

Endless difficulty is too easy. I've never seen the AI build a carrier. 

The patch called Preview 1.1.15 that Velorace mentioned was a preview patch before it was officially released (which it has been). The AI builds Medium-Large ships in most of their fleets. However, you may not see them right now depending on how fast you complete the game.

If you need proof I'd be happy to upload screenshots from some games where the AI did build large ships. 

I've actually seen the AI build large ships on Normal. Both Cravers and Sophons for sure.

Honestly, I think the reason why your finding the game "too easy" is that either you are only playing to win (using min/max), or are just too good for the AI. For the vast majority of players even playing on Hard/Serious is a tough challenge, me included. I play games for the experience, not just winning. Sure I try to win, but in the end it's more fun to play the game, overcome challenges, win a war despite all odds. If you are playing the game in the mindset of simply winning, using min/max strats, you cheapen the experience and lose the same enjoyment you would have otherwise.

JorgasElite wrote:

Honestly, I think the reason why your finding the game "too easy" is that either you are only playing to win (using min/max), or are just too good for the AI. For the vast majority of players even playing on Hard/Serious is a tough challenge, me included. I play games for the experience, not just winning. Sure I try to win, but in the end it's more fun to play the game, overcome challenges, win a war despite all odds. If you are playing the game in the mindset of simply winning, using min/max strats, you cheapen the experience and lose the same enjoyment you would have otherwise.

This is basically how I play as well. I'm really not interested in following someone else's perfect build order then acting all proud because I won at Endless. I prefer games to unfold organically and have the AI act appropriately for whichever race it is playing.

Endless difficulty is too easy. I've never seen the AI build a carrier. 

Lightjolly wrote:

Ai is such a fickle thing

If it's too easy, you're going to have a bad time

If it's too hard, you're going to have a bad time.

I agree whit Lighthjolly at this point... and this is why i believe playing multiplayer is also a good idea too. It can be much more fun and interesting, because players are able to do things that AI will never achieve, like creating a plan to win the game. I dont exactly know how AI Behave, if it is boosted by FIDSI or not, but i still believe that playing against other players is much better than playing against the AI. One time i fought a battle whit another player in a 1x1 and it was real fun, he always came whit something new in play i had to deal whit in order to win. That match was really intersting to play. 

KingValkyrik wrote:

I have 650 hours dropped on Civ 5 and I have yet to even touch Diety. Not even played it once! Why? Because I know it will wreck me. I know that in order to surpass that difficulty I will have to trim away all of my erroneous builds / moves away until I get it all perfect. If that still doesn't work then I will be left to scour youtube and guides on how to beat it because I know it's just that difficult. I can beat immortal with any victory condition but the jump to diety is just that insane, I know it.

But with ES2? By turn 10 on fast speed / endless difficulty I can tell if I've won. Maybe a rough start? Turn 20/30 and I'll have won the game.

Now I know that in combat both games are about equal garbage. If you want to beat Diety on Civ 5 you're gonna be abusing the shit out of combat mechanics. If you want to stop the AI from expanding / spreading religion all over the damn place you're gonna be at war constantly. I can't tell you how many times I go to war with f***ing Spain because all they want to do is send missionaries and prophets all damn game. So I just sit there and snipe their missionaries.

But with ES2 the game doesn't even get to that point, the AIs all fall behind so quick that anyone, literally anyone, who has theorycrafted or looked up a guide thats been theorycrafted for a build order will auto win. And thats all there is to it. Each race has a build order to maximize growth, expansion and science while skirting military as much as possible (unless military race ofc) and thats it, that build order will always create such a lead that the AIs will never hope to catch up.

Now I will admit there are ways to make the game forcibly harder whether its putting restrictions on one's self or skewing the generation of the galaxy in such a way as to give you a massive disadvantage, etc. And sure for some that might be enough, but for me I like a game at its intended difficulty. I want to play a game at its intended hardest level and beat it.

Anyway love the game, just come back every once in awhile to play for an hour or two realize why I don't play anymore and then leave so just wanted to give my .02.

I have to agree whit King in a certain point. that reason he described, of feeling like that you can win a game before it actually ends, is the primary reason i stopped many matches from playing and left many matches against the AI uncompleted. The AI is pretty good at a certain point, but when it comes to difficulty level... it is not perfect in its aspect. the AI always make many mistakes in its choices, crippling his potential to grow faster. Also, AI dont makes plans like real players. they can't plan a strategy. they can't make you think what is their next move. they can't innovate the battlefield. they are just a "stone" into the middle of the galaxy you have to deal whit, that rarely able to perform difficult fights. it's just pattern. nothing very interesting on it. 

If you believe the game is too easy to play, try it on multiplayer mode. i believe that if you find AI easy, if you play the game whit some serious people in multiplayer instance, you will figure it out that the game has much more depth than you believe and it can be very interesting to play and forge plans to victory. 

I hope this helped! :)

lakp wrote:

Endless difficulty is too easy. I've never seen the AI build a carrier. 

I believe there is an alternative patch into the game that allows AI to build ships that aren't small ships. i believe that the current version of endless space can only spawn small ships into the ai, but i saw they realeased a new version in wich AI can build medium and large ships. It is called Preview 1.1.15 the version of the game that allows it... im not sure how to acess this version either. i had to manually trigger it and acessed it whit the help of a friend. 

I dont know if this version is official either...

Frogsquadron wrote:

Slashman wrote:

OK on this point I don't exactly agree. AFAIK, the AI in ES 2 does not have a different set of intelligence algorithims for Normal than it does on Endless. It simply gets FIDSI bonuses. That distinction is important to understand when assessing AI competence. The AI does more "smart" stuff at higher levels because it doesn't have to earn its resources in the same way that a human player does. 

The AI in ES2 doesn't simply get more FIDSI (that was true of the AI in ES, though). The AI in ES2 also becomes quite a bit more agressive as its difficulty level scales up, rendering more likely to do the sneaky "smart" stuff, whereas it's happy to tag along in lower difficulty modes.

As mentioned by eruanion, a game save showing a specific behavior that could be improved (along with a good description of what led up to that point) would be handier than high-level discussion of systems.

More agressive? i think i will check up endless difficulty then! i love AGGRESSIVE things in space :)

lakp wrote:

Endless difficulty is too easy. I've never seen the AI build a carrier. 

The patch called Preview 1.1.15 that Velorace mentioned was a preview patch before it was officially released (which it has been). The AI builds Medium-Large ships in most of their fleets. However, you may not see them right now depending on how fast you complete the game.

If you need proof I'd be happy to upload screenshots from some games where the AI did build large ships. 

Velorace wrote:

lakp wrote:

Endless difficulty is too easy. I've never seen the AI build a carrier. 

I believe there is an alternative patch into the game that allows AI to build ships that aren't small ships. i believe that the current version of endless space can only spawn small ships into the ai, but i saw they realeased a new version in wich AI can build medium and large ships. It is called Preview 1.1.15 the version of the game that allows it... im not sure how to acess this version either. i had to manually trigger it and acessed it whit the help of a friend. 

I dont know if this version is official either...

Pretty sure it's official, Preview 1.1.15 was simply an unofficial preview for players who wanted to play with the new changes before they were officially released. But the patch was officially released some time ago. 

For anyone here who is saying it's too easy for you to win, keep in mind whether or not you're playing with the intended goal to win, or just to experience the game. Endless Space 2 is a strategy game, and like any strategy games is far easier when you have the intended goal (and a plan) to win. If you're just playing for fun and the experience, then Hard, Serious and Endless difficulty provide nice challenges that aren't too easy, since you're not playing with the intended goal of winning, so there's no rush, and no real calculation, aka "it's turn 10 or smth and ohhh I know I'm gonna win b/c of x, y, & z" 

Go play Stellaris, or you can go multiplayer if you dare.

I really feel like the game is meant to be played on low resources. It's not a huge difficulty boost, but it makes the game much more strategic.

Lightjolly wrote:

Most people play single player in the 4x genre, hence why it's also the genre you constantly see complaints about ai incompetence, I would play multiplayer ifI had pals to play with :(

The problem with me and multiplayer is the way I play 4x games. I very often will play maybe 6 or 7 turns and then switch over to something else. Either another game type or catch up on some anime or watch a series on Netflix. I like to take my time before hitting end turn and I really hate rushing of any kind in 4x games. That is exactly the opposite of what most multiplayer people encourage.

Lightjolly wrote:

nuyu wrote:

Go play Stellaris, or you can go multiplayer if you dare.

Stellaris ai isn't that much better. Many times puts ridiculous improvements on their planet tiles

Velorace wrote:

 I agree whit Lighthjolly at this point... and this is why i believe playing multiplayer is also a good idea too. It can be much more fun and interesting, because players are able to do things that AI will never achieve, like creating a plan to win the game. I dont exactly know how AI Behave, if it is boosted by FIDSI or not, but i still believe that playing against other players is much better than playing against the AI. One time i fought a battle whit another player in a 1x1 and it was real fun, he always came whit something new in play i had to deal whit in order to win. That match was really intersting to play. 

Most people play single player in the 4x genre, hence why it's also the genre you constantly see complaints about ai incompetence, I would play multiplayer ifI had pals to play with :(

*Hint* Thats your que to give me your steam name 

So sad... im currently finding a loit of fun playing 1x1 whit friends. i just found a friend that plays veryh handsomely, trying to be competitive. I've even made a post of my first match whit him, called Endless Tales , wich turned up to be an awesome story of a great epic battle i just fought in 1x1. If people complain that AI is too easy, i'd recommend them to check up 1x1 or at least 1x1x1. Its true that playing whit more people would make the game much more intersting and fun to play, but as it is nearly impossible to organize those parties in a way we can continue our matches later (then in this case, we have to play a match all in one "bite") i'd recommend for players, in case of not finding groups of players to play whit (one possible way to solve it, bur hardly) to play 1x1 or 1x1x1 or something like that. It's always good to have the ability to stop the match for a while and continue it in a later period of time. But until something like that is possible, try playing multiplayer matches whit less people. It can be even a epic match if your opponent does his best to win, just like you! :)

that is where i found Joy in endless space 2. players will ALWAYS behave like gods before ais, because AI have limits, any AI does. but players, can be Endless. :)

I really don't understand why people are so hung up on beating the most buffed AI. These games are more complicated than chess AI and the current trend(since the 90's) is to have better graphics with the gaming industry. That doesn't mean the gameplay is second important, but the AI is. You can easily mod the game to give it 9999 multipliers and try to beat the challenge. In Europa Universalis 4 AI case. The gameplay is locked with lots and lots of time wasting features(war exhaustion, truce limits, stability, overextension, forced rival choice, force limits, etc...) It is not because AI makes good decisions you feel challenged in other strategy games it is because there are lots of limits which puts you more similar situations with the AI. In ES2 there is only planet colonization limit. 

Unless the world bored with the reality and started to depend on more advanced AI (in today's world there are lots of types of reality, which is bizarre but it has started) maybe after that Nvdia would make nvdiAI rather than physics. I don't think ES2 AI is downright stupid and AI work is a continuous project, ends with the last patch. I think AI after serious gives enough challenge with normal speed in a medium-sized map. 

The crux of the issue with the AI in this game is that it cannot build good fleets. They otherwise play fairly well. It seldom ever - like 1% of games - uses strategic modules, and has no idea how to make best use of the many support modules. Not only that, they do not use the enhanced hulls.

For as long as AI fleets are sub par, you can do anything you like vs. them because you are playing with a different set of rules entirely.

Aitarus wrote:

The crux of the issue with the AI in this game is that it cannot build good fleets. They otherwise play fairly well. It seldom ever - like 1% of games - uses strategic modules, and has no idea how to make best use of the many support modules. Not only that, they do not use the enhanced hulls.

For as long as AI fleets are sub par, you can do anything you like vs. them because you are playing with a different set of rules entirely.

This was a problem in EL as well. The AI could not equip itself properly with strategic weapons and armor, rendering their units almost always underperforming versus a human. I had thought that the issue was addressed in ES 2 though. People were reporting stategics on AI ships captured. If it keeps being an issue, then maybe it is time to remove strategics altogether from combat and replace it with a different system. Or otherwise make their use something that the AI is not confused over.

I was toying with the idea that instead of spending strategics on each ship individually, that once you research the modules and the tech for harvesting the strategic, you could instead pay a fixed amount of each strategic. Then you can automatically place them on each ship without additional cost. That may stop the AI from thinking it is a bad choice to use them on ships when they could be used for something else. (I assume that is the major issue with strategics currently and the AI)