I can't complain about the AI at all. And I've seen quite some carrier fleets actually. And this wasn't even on endless difficulty. Wanna know my secret? Sure, you do. :P

The biggest strength of the ES2 AI is probably its biggest weakness, too. 

So, what you guys should try is to adjust the victory conditions. The AI pathways really have to be limited in some ways to help it out.

There are ways to follow and even view what the AI does via browser. I'm not sure if it's still possible to connect to E.N.F.E.R. but it was in the past.

My assumption is, that some of you are playing offensive military style as most MP hardened people do - it's just natural. You might not even go for easy science or economic victories but some of the AI probably will. And when the AI goes that pathway, it probably won't focus on the left quadrant in the tech-wheel - hence no carriers.

Personally, I think the ES2 AI is quite good. Sure, there's always room for improvement. However, one time I got my ass kicked so hard by the Cravers it still hurts to this very day. And there are quite some more games where I struggled and had to overcome great odds.

Give the AI some room, play on big maps and not on quick speed. Reduce nodes, curiosities, ressources and events to make the game even harder if that isn't enough already. 

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.

Yep get where you are comming from.  AI needs to be more agressive at the cost of passive play.  Otherwise you play and forget.  It is a 4X game is it not.

I'm of two minds on the OP's post.

First, if the very first thing you're going to do is look up min/max guides, it is pretty obvious that you are not interested in gradually learning the game and getting better, but want to just win anyway. There are very few strategy games where each race doesn't have some kind of optimal build. If your intention is to play that way from the start, there is no AI in the world that can win against you except by some unearthly luck. The AI doesn't look up min/max/optimal build guides. I doubt most people play that way, but the ones that do tend to appear on the forum asking for better AI.

On the other hand, I agree that the AI is still not up to scratch in a number of areas. Their aggressive attitudes do not match theri actions in many cases. They don't go to war when it would make sense to. They do nto seem to have much of a war strategy in terms of which systems they want to invade or how to distribute their fleets. Also, I think that the asymetrical nature of the races makes several of them very hard to play for the AI. These quirks result in more effective play for an informed human, but tend to hinder the progress of an AI player.

My thoughts on solutions are also twofold:

1) Base AI improvement across all areas of concern. This is very difficult and likely will not yield the types of results we're all hoping for. AI coding is hard and grows more so with the complexity of the game.

2) Challenge provided by the universe itself. I've been pushing for this and asking for it for a while. The universe of the game needs to be able to throw out challenges and obstacles for the players apart from the AI. Giant space monsters, random events when a player is coasting along towards an easy "hit end turn" victory. If moe challenge is to come, it is going to come from the cruel randomness of the universe wanting to kill the player.

Those are practical and sensible points Slashman. 

ES2 is still having content added. Espionage is the next big thing. I'd like to see a bit more of an emphasis on mechanics the AI can grasp. It will be hard to come up with systems that are both complicated enough to be engaging and simple enough for an AI to use, but I think it's a really important task for game design. 

Ai can always be improved, it took civ 5 two years and two expansions before it's ai became decent.

Sure the es2 devs can improve the ai with time

Lightjolly wrote:

Ai can always be improved, it took civ 5 two years and two expansions before it's ai became decent.

Sure the es2 devs can improve the ai with time

No doubt the game is still growing and I do have faith in Amplitude that they will stick with it. Maybe someday we'll see a G2G Balance mod aimed at more effective AI.

Slashman wrote:

I'm of two minds on the OP's post.

First, if the very first thing you're going to do is look up min/max guides, it is pretty obvious that you are not interested in gradually learning the game and getting better, but want to just win anyway. There are very few strategy games where each race doesn't have some kind of optimal build. If your intention is to play that way from the start, there is no AI in the world that can win against you except by some unearthly luck. The AI doesn't look up min/max/optimal build guides. I doubt most people play that way, but the ones that do tend to appear on the forum asking for better AI.

My first paragraph explains how after 650 hours I haven't touched diety because its really hard and I will have to fix my build order(s) as much as possible and if all else fails look up guides.... I mean.. I don't know what more to say on how I approach games and guides.

 

On the other hand, I agree that the AI is still not up to scratch in a number of areas. Their aggressive attitudes do not match theri actions in many cases. They don't go to war when it would make sense to. They do nto seem to have much of a war strategy in terms of which systems they want to invade or how to distribute their fleets. Also, I think that the asymetrical nature of the races makes several of them very hard to play for the AI. These quirks result in more effective play for an informed human, but tend to hinder the progress of an AI player.

Agreed. 

2) Challenge provided by the universe itself. I've been pushing for this and asking for it for a while. The universe of the game needs to be able to throw out challenges and obstacles for the players apart from the AI. Giant space monsters, random events when a player is coasting along towards an easy "hit end turn" victory. If moe challenge is to come, it is going to come from the cruel randomness of the universe wanting to kill the player.

Agreed. 

I'm not sure where anyone here is getting the whole "the game AI is/are really bad and don't do 'this', 'this', and 'this'" but you guys have to be playing at a lower difficulty or smth. In nearly all of my Endless level games, the AI makes alliances with other AI factions, systematically targets and destroys expanionsist empires that threaten multiple AI players, and uses Diplomacy quite well, (any of ya'll played as the Vodyani only to be smacked with a bunch of advanced diplomatic demands that each reduce your empire influence production by 75%, effectivily making you unable to partcipate in the diplomatic screen, or pass any laws of your own, pretty freakin smart in my opinion). The AI also does build varied fleets, especially late game and the issue of it only hiring mercenaries and building small-medium sized ships was fixed a couple of patches ago sooo. 

Furthermore, they are better the other AIs, and tend to expand quickly and until Part 2 of the Academy Quest, activly complete quests. 

The AI isn't perfect, and like most game AIs (I played League of Legends when its AI was 100x dumber than it is now) needs a lot of work, but a lot of the criticism here appears to be either unfounded or out of ignorance. 

And this isn't to say that the AI should be a learning AI, that would make the game far more interesting and challenging, but I think there's a perfectly good reason that the DEVs have chosen not to implement it (yet?). 

Suis3i wrote:

I'm not sure where anyone here is getting the whole "the game AI is/are really bad and don't do 'this', 'this', and 'this'" but you guys have to be playing at a lower difficulty or smth. In nearly all of my Endless level games, the AI makes alliances with other AI factions, systematically targets and destroys expanionsist empires that threaten multiple AI players, and uses Diplomacy quite well, (any of ya'll played as the Vodyani only to be smacked with a bunch of advanced diplomatic demands that each reduce your empire influence production by 75%, effectivily making you unable to partcipate in the diplomatic screen, or pass any laws of your own, pretty freakin smart in my opinion). The AI also does build varied fleets, especially late game and the issue of it only hiring mercenaries and building small-medium sized ships was fixed a couple of patches ago sooo. 

Furthermore, they are better the other AIs, and tend to expand quickly and until Part 2 of the Academy Quest, activly complete quests. 

My question is why doesn't the AI do these things at lower difficulties. I don't play on Endless and likely never will. If the only reason that the AI can play the game with any competence is that it out-produces, out-earns and out-researches me by default, then there are certainly more than a few issues going on. That's bonuses playing the game, not AI. 

What you just described is not smart behavior, its behavior due to the fact that the AI gets so many bonuses at that level that it can do anything it wants. I have never once been diplomatically overwhelmed at lower difficulties, especially not at normal, by AI demands.

The AI isn't perfect, and like most game AIs (I played League of Legends when its AI was 100x dumber than it is now) needs a lot of work, but a lot of the criticism here appears to be either unfounded or out of ignorance. 

And this isn't to say that the AI should be a learning AI, that would make the game far more interesting and challenging, but I think there's a perfectly good reason that the DEVs have chosen not to implement it (yet?). 

League of Legends is in an entirely different category than a 4x and thus it has entirely different problems to solve. The thing is that it can afford to have crappy AI because it is primarily a multiplayer game. Humans are supposed to fill the slots, not bots. It's the same reason that the Vermintide AI bots are not that awesome. Its a multiplayer co-op game first and foremost.

Look if they made the AI do the same things it does on Endless difficulty for the lower difficulties, then there would be no point to setting the AI at Endless difficulty, as those "features" or as you put it, "bonuses" are what makes the AI difficult. There is a reason why there are difficulties in the first place, and putting features that make the AI act more like a person playing that faction, for lower difficulties would defeat the point in playing at lower difficulties (since people playing at that level either can't handle the AI being so difficult, or they want to quickly try something out/have 'stress-free fun, etc). If you want to face an AI that is "smarter" or makes "smarter" decisions, then increase the difficulty level. 

The AI at higher difficulties is just playing like an above-average player, making smarter decisions that someone would actually think through. 

The comparison to LoL was an example of an AI, that over time got better, and even then, they still have 3 difficulties for the AI in which the AI acts differently/makes "smarter" decisions at the higher difficulties. 

I could go on and on about other games that have AIs with different difficulties, where at each difficulty the AI does something different that makes it "smarter" and, well, more difficult and why this even exists in games. 

On top of that, like you pointed out, AI coding is difficult and honestly, for a game as complex as ES2, I'm surprised the AI does well on Endless difficulty (this of course changes based on Galaxy Generation crap and what victory you're trying to attain). 

AND 

I wasn't even aiming my post at you lmao, you made some valid points and weren't exactly complaining. 

I totally agree that anyone looking at build order guides and crap has no real interest in learning the game and playing it for any other goal than just beating it (which is. Not. The. Point. Of. The. Game. It's to have fun, and in ES2's case, to discover new things and really become engaged). 

And I definitely agree the AI isn't perfect or the absolute best, like it's good, but not the best.

And you pointed out some sound solutions, I too want an overall well rounded AI at all levels, but for what it's at right now, it's not terrible (that's why I pointed out LoL's AI, b/c back in 2012 that thing was horrendous). And increased amount of events like giant space monsters and such and such, dude, freakin, awesome. It'd increase random difficulty that the player can't exactly control and would be interesting (especially from a lore perspective) 

So yee lol, my post was just @ unfounded (sometimes ignorant) complaints. 

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.

Suis3i wrote:

Look if they made the AI do the same things it does on Endless difficulty for the lower difficulties, then there would be no point to setting the AI at Endless difficulty, as those "features" or as you put it, "bonuses" are what makes the AI difficult. There is a reason why there are difficulties in the first place, and putting features that make the AI act more like a person playing that faction, for lower difficulties would defeat the point in playing at lower difficulties (since people playing at that level either can't handle the AI being so difficult, or they want to quickly try something out/have 'stress-free fun, etc). If you want to face an AI that is "smarter" or makes "smarter" decisions, then increase the difficulty level. 

The AI at higher difficulties is just playing like an above-average player, making smarter decisions that someone would actually think through. 

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. As soon as that cushion is removed, it gets "dumber" because it actually has to put in the same work as a human to reach the same levels of earning that allow it to be competitive. Then as a result of its higher earning, it can do things like send large mixed fleets and apply diplomatic pressure more efficiently.

The downside of this is that those same bonuses create a very unfair advantage in areas where the AI doesn't need help and forces very specific playstyles from the human player. A bunch of other game systems are then thrown out of whack as a result. Like the deeds given when unlocking various tech tiers. "Be the first to build x or the first to earn y or the first with approval z." Along with quests conditions, a human player will then have to jump through some hoops to achieve what the buffed up AI can do by just sitting there.

So yes, in some aspects, difficulty bonuses make the AI seem smarter, at the cost of throwing other aspects of the game out of whack. And then there are many areas where all the bonuses in the world won't make the AI make smart decisions. Especially thinking-ahead decisions.

The comparison to LoL was an example of an AI, that over time got better, and even then, they still have 3 difficulties for the AI in which the AI acts differently/makes "smarter" decisions at the higher difficulties. 

I could go on and on about other games that have AIs with different difficulties, where at each difficulty the AI does something different that makes it "smarter" and, well, more difficult and why this even exists in games. 

On top of that, like you pointed out, AI coding is difficult and honestly, for a game as complex as ES2, I'm surprised the AI does well on Endless difficulty (this of course changes based on Galaxy Generation crap and what victory you're trying to attain). 

AND 

I wasn't even aiming my post at you lmao, you made some valid points and weren't exactly complaining. 

I totally agree that anyone looking at build order guides and crap has no real interest in learning the game and playing it for any other goal than just beating it (which is. Not. The. Point. Of. The. Game. It's to have fun, and in ES2's case, to discover new things and really become engaged). 

And I definitely agree the AI isn't perfect or the absolute best, like it's good, but not the best.

And you pointed out some sound solutions, I too want an overall well rounded AI at all levels, but for what it's at right now, it's not terrible (that's why I pointed out LoL's AI, b/c back in 2012 that thing was horrendous). And increased amount of events like giant space monsters and such and such, dude, freakin, awesome. It'd increase random difficulty that the player can't exactly control and would be interesting (especially from a lore perspective) 

So yee lol, my post was just @ unfounded (sometimes ignorant) complaints. 

Sorry if you thought I was singling you out when I used your LoL example. I was more trying to illustrate that turn-based 4x games, especially ones as complex as ES 2 are a different kind of beast. Games like LoL can actually afford to have non-optimal AI for bots because their primary focus is different and the game environment and mechanics are different as well. 

In any case, we can agree for the most part that ES 2 AI isn't horrible. It just has some frustrating weak spots that could use cleaning up. I'm probably making that sound much easier than it actually is to do. lol

What I find comforting about Es 2 is that currently, compared to where Endless Legend was in terms of timeline for AI improvement, the AI in Es 2 is much more competent. 

I remember waiting and working with the devs to try to improve the AI in EL which was way more difficult because of the way it was built. Changing anything in the AI in EL could have major impact on a bunch of other systems.

Oh yeah, most definitly, the AI in EL had so many issues and its clear that this one in ES2, even at its current stage is still better