Massive Assault :: View topic

Massive Assault http://www.massiveassault.com/forum/

AI Levels http://www.massiveassault.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=2199	Page 1 of 1

Author:	Quitch [ Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:19 pm ]
Post subject:	AI Levels
I said the AI didn't seem much different in the demo, but then I realised I may have made some false assumptions about the AI levels. There are five levels. I know at one level you get more SAs than the AI and at another it gets more than you. Now are the differences along the lines of: Relaxed: 2 SAs less than you Easy: 1 SA less than you Medium: Equal SAs Hard: One more SA than you Insane: Two more SAs than you or is it more like: Relaxed: Less SAs than you, dumb AI Easy: Dumb AI Medium: Medium AI Hard: Smartest AI Insane: Smartest AI, more SAs than you What exactly ARE the level differences? I'd lean towards the later being correct due to the fact the scenarios only had, IIRC, three difficulty levels.

Author:	RMJ [ Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:44 pm ]
Post subject:
Based on my tests there's no difference between AI intelligence on different levels. Just the SA count differs. 'Insane' AI is still stupid (well, maybe bit better than in MA. Atleast it 'knows' how to use transporters).

Author:	Enforcer [ Thu Mar 10, 2005 6:18 pm ]
Post subject:
that's dissapointing, was hoping the ai would have improved since MA but after invading a neutral then pulling all excpet 1 unit out (handing me the neutral next turn) and after invading 3 of my coutnries with a solo unit i was hoping the poor skill of the ai was due to it being on medium. I've always felt difficulty setting should be more based on improving the way the computer plays rather than giving it an advantge in numbers while still keeping it stupid. Also the order it moves units in seems worse compared to MA many times i've seen it either move a weak unit to the front line causing less damage than it is able to on that turn, and it often blocks ranged units again reducing the ammount of damage he causes on his turn (good example is the final demo campain mission, I made it so comp could only move 1 unit onto the bridge each turn (which i'd then destroy) it never used the bot as support just moved forward a tank then squashed in the other units as best it could with the bot always too far back. The target choosing has degraded too, 2 tanks, a mortor and a lav vs 3 turrets, lav only has 1 target which the computer takes out with a tank and the mortor wasting a point of damage? All in all AI's very dissapointing (not seen it use transports at all yet guess the right opportunity hasn't arrived, altho i've seen it drive lavs and tanks about 5 spaces to get them into combat.)

Author:

Quitch [ Thu Mar 10, 2005 6:39 pm ]

Post subject:

I agree, it seems that in many areas the AI is trying to do clever things but is making a mess of them and ends up doing less than in MA.

On one game I declared my first SA and found the PL declared next to me, four tanks. On their first go they attacked, but on the second he withdrew from his border and placed a few units there. Needless to say I then proceeded to invade and take the territory. WTF?

It's nice to see something different from the utterly tedious and predictable LAV/Mortar setup, followed by tanks from the second front, but it really does drop some clangers. On the upside, the AI doesn't pussy foot around as much when it comes to invading neutrals... mostly a good thing, but sometimes it should turn around and move to another battle.

Its transport handling is poor at best. It deployed a tank and an Ostrich in a rather ineffecient way, though nothing too bad. It then proceeded to move its transport into a corner and leave it there, despite there being many good uses for that transport.

See the attached replay for an example of me exploiting the AI flaws (What a comeback!) to win a game I would never have won against a human opponent. You'll see the transport usage I mentioned in it.

This is my third world war, I haven't lost one yet, and based on this replay I never will.

IMO the unit choices at the beginning are better, but some of its tactical decisions seem worse (as you mentioned, its targetting for one doesn't seem as good). and I have witnessed a couple of insane ones, such as the withdrawal from the border (Second World War Win). It does also seem to over use bunkers.

I was really hoping this was due to the AI being on medium. However, this, combined with the subscription model, means I think I'll have to be giving this one a miss. Sorry guys.

Attachments:

Second world war win.rep [14.58 KiB]
Downloaded 1231 times

What a comeback!.rep [38.61 KiB]
Downloaded 1268 times

Author:	VDmitry [ Fri Mar 11, 2005 3:18 am ]
Post subject:
Generally, AI is better. Not genius of course and definitely does stupid things. And he thinks too much for me on largest map. Currently I'm playing Career with him on "Station Thorn" (4th or 5th Career battle). It is most difficult war for now (not mention my current multiplayer battles of course). 10 turns left and I have power ratio almost 1:2 in his favor. Damned armored LAVs, Mortars and Robots... Luckily I just have one (only) succesfull attack on his small ally with only worth division. Still hoping to win of course.

Author:	Enforcer [ Fri Mar 11, 2005 3:47 am ]
Post subject:
well the campains are designed to compensate for the poor ai (giving it superior numbers/psoition) but in world war it just doesn't create a challenge in the demo. Unlike Quitch i'll still be buying the game as i;m use to poor ai in games I buy them for the multiplayer and altho from what I've gathered from ppl that have it the multiplayer is the same jsut with more units and maps it'll keep me occupied for a few months (the free ones) Wether I pay beyond that depends on what new content comes out before then (assualt mode for multiplayer comes to mind, been told that it would be boring being the defender, then how about 2 players starting at different ends of the map, 1st 1 to reach the middle of a heavily defended ai controlled base wins)

Author:	Quitch [ Fri Mar 11, 2005 4:12 am ]
Post subject:
I'm used to poor AI, but unfortunately in this game I am cused with being reasonably good, which means the AI really gets shown up, and I've never been a fan of giving the AI an edge. In most games I resort to team skirmishes to try and balance the AI, but this game doesn't feature anything other than 1v1. Multiplayer would be appealing and reason enough to buy, but I am not willing to pay a subscription for this game. I just thought the real kick in the teeth was they want you to buy Domination, then release a demo which locks down pretty much everything except the bunker. Without trying any new features, what's there to make me want the expansion?? After just four world wars I can already see how the AI thinks. Its front line has changed to tanks from LAVs and Mortars, but now it prefers Ostriches as its second line. If it ever surrounds a territory it will build tanks in its first SA and then bots on the other side in its second. IMO, bots are a really poor choice on a map that small. On top of that it still covers borders with LAVs, even when it knows they're neutral, and fails to redeploy those LAVs. Thus far I've only seen it use a transport once, so again I am winning simply by being able to deploy more firepower into an area.

Author:	Enforcer [ Fri Mar 11, 2005 4:42 am ]
Post subject:
well to be honest i rarely play a game for more than a few months anyway, then i tend to get bored of it, i only played ma this long cause i got involved in the clan wars. So the free 4months is fine with me, i understand why they need to charge if they are itnen ding to do the same as MAN and release maps and stuff, but will wait to see what they release in the 4 months before i pay any more.

Author:	Quitch [ Fri Mar 11, 2005 8:17 am ]
Post subject:
Unfortunately, for the more casual player like myself a subscription is simply not worth it.

Author:	Enforcer [ Fri Mar 11, 2005 10:20 am ]
Post subject:
how about just play it for 4 months then?

Author:	Quitch [ Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:12 am ]
Post subject:
What about the games I don't finish? Or if I want to play it again later? Maybe if the demo had shown me that the new modes would hold my attention, or given me a larger map and all the AI modes, but it didn't and so I am left thinking the SP side of things isn't strong enough to be worth the money.

Author:	Mrakobes [ Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:25 am ]
Post subject:
anybody still need the AI for anything but looking around maps?just go to multiplayer if you want changes

Author:	Quitch [ Fri Mar 11, 2005 12:22 pm ]
Post subject:
LOL, still in the dark as to the size of the offline market, eh, Mrakobes?

Author:	musashi_san [ Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:26 pm ]
Post subject:
he's right, you know (quitch i mean). not everyone wants to play online all the time. i really like the single player side of it, and would really only consider playing online when i had mastered sp. i hate to lose to a human, but the computer? not as much, anyway. still trying to decide if this is worth buying. really, the original one is so bug ridden it's been painfull to play. i adore this game from a design perspective, but i will think long and hard about buying the sequel unless i hear that it's quite a bit more stable. the only plus side i see to the subscription thing is that it might make it possible for them to patch it untill it's actually stable, both for sp and mp. speaking of which, any news on when they might have the patch?

Author:	Mrakobes [ Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:33 pm ]
Post subject:
Quitch - i do not care enough...i am not publisher and that's not my business to care about how many copies has been sold.

Author:	Daledvm [ Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:43 am ]
Post subject:
Mrakobes. Maybe you should be concerned with how many copies are sold. Do you like this series of games? Would you like to see the series continue? If they do not make money on this one I can guarantee that you won't see any more in the future! Most of your posts defend the game as is. If you do like it just the way it is why are you in the forum anyway. Just get to playing. The more of your posts I read make me realize you are very shortsighted. I have noted that the AI plays with the same intelligence on all levels but just gets a different number of SAs. I have also noted that when playing on different difficulty levels and then changing the starting options. (i.e. from low to high starting SA's) the game gets screwed up and assigns the wrong # of starting SA's for me.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/