If I may be allowed to refer to "reality" within a computer game context...
It doesn't bother me that the AI can take shortcuts of certain kinds. Building a unit with slightly less shields is OK; at least it has to build the unit, and I can even see that with a spy. I understand that the game has to be made more even for the computer to give a good fight.
I can accept it getting tech advances at a cheaper beaker cost. Same reasoning as above.
But it shouldn't be allowed to directly contravene things like battle odds, movement, treaties. At some point, the game has to follow its own rules. I shouldn't have to expect my dragoon to die attacking an AI settler on flat ground, for example, or have the AI pop a chariot at a brand-new city the turn I build it on a continent it has not yet found.
It becomes too annoying when you have to remember two sets of outcomes for everything, one human and one AI.
------------------
Proud participant in GameLeague...
Proud Warrior of the O.W.L. Alliance...
It doesn't bother me that the AI can take shortcuts of certain kinds. Building a unit with slightly less shields is OK; at least it has to build the unit, and I can even see that with a spy. I understand that the game has to be made more even for the computer to give a good fight.
I can accept it getting tech advances at a cheaper beaker cost. Same reasoning as above.
But it shouldn't be allowed to directly contravene things like battle odds, movement, treaties. At some point, the game has to follow its own rules. I shouldn't have to expect my dragoon to die attacking an AI settler on flat ground, for example, or have the AI pop a chariot at a brand-new city the turn I build it on a continent it has not yet found.
It becomes too annoying when you have to remember two sets of outcomes for everything, one human and one AI.
------------------
Proud participant in GameLeague...
Proud Warrior of the O.W.L. Alliance...
Comment