The critical mass problem - Page 2

mindlar · February 23, 2003, 19:39

Yes there is a snowball effect, however it doesn't happen until late enough in the game that it wouldn't make much of a difference.

When I control half the galaxy, have a larger military than everyone else combined, and am doing 2/3 of the galactic research is usually about when the other civilizations start keeling over and joining me. Basically it shortens the tedium of the end game by reducing the amount of mop up that needs to be done.

Loserboy · March 4, 2003, 08:58

Do you have to accept the other civs. joining you?

IE. If another civ. starts groveling and surrenders, can I just have an evil laugh and say, "No thank you, we already have one"
And then go on a genocidal rampage, to remove these filthy creatures from MY galaxy?

-----------------------------------------------------------
So after a hectic week of believing that war was peace, that good was bad, that the moon was made of blue cheese, and that God needed a lot of money sent to a certain box number, the Monk started to believe that thirty-five percent of all tables were hermaphrodites, and then broke down

Comrade Tribune · March 4, 2003, 14:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Draginol
When the player has won, the game should acknowledge that. Not just because it moves things forward more quickly but because it's fun to see computer players say things like "You've crushed our civilization, we beg for mercy and surrender to you and your greatness!"

We want groveling!

Or as the Torians so meekly put it when you talk to them in situations like the above:

"I don't feel I'm even worthy to speak to such great and powerful beings. But I will try my best. How may we humbly serve you?"

I think this game will be great!

Well- thought-out concepts, great atmosphere and dialogue, and the project leader didn´t get fired when the game was halfway complete!

Looks good.

Chronus · March 5, 2003, 11:24

This game looks fun. I'm looking forward to it.

Quote:

I can see a snowball effect, where you and an single ally get to a certain critical mass of power, from which all other races agree to join you.

I'm a bit concerned about this as well. But, then again, the opposite is that "mop up effect" we have to deal with.

I guess some of us want that "mop up effect" because we hope that somehow, the AI will find a way of making a comeback.

That's what it comes down to, isn't it? We simply want a game that's challenging throughout its entirety (duh!)

With that said, I hope the developers made the most difficult level . . . impossible! Literally. Why? Because no matter how difficult the developers make a game, people find a way to defeat it, and in less time than I would expect. Can everyone recite a quote wherein the developers claim the impossibility of defeating the hardest level . . . and even calling the level "Impossible"? And can you recall what happened? Bragging victories were posted within a few weeks.

Harry Seldon · March 5, 2003, 21:46

They've got one better. They don't have to make it impossible by default; they use the Metaverse. Players upload their stats to an online database then download a composite update to the AI that incorporates winning strategies from human players. If you're innovative enough, you'll find a way to win but if you can't think outside the proverbial box, you'll get toasted. It's like Deep Blue for strategy games.

Draginol · March 5, 2003, 22:00

I can't imagine someone beating the AI players on "incredible". Based on the metaverse stats, no one has ever beaten the game with all AI players set to incredible. Heck, I'm not aware of anyone beating the game on Genius level either.

The game should be pretty easy to beat on the lower levels though. A good AI isn't about making it hard to beat, it's about providing a challenging experience that is fun.

Lemmy · March 6, 2003, 05:43

What are all the difficulty levels btw?
I assume 'incredible' is the hardest and 'genius' the 2nd hardest, what are the other levels?

playshogi · March 7, 2003, 01:03

Let's say in GC, I control 40% and my Ally controls 30% and one enemy remains with 30%. Now you said that the Allied AI won't backstab you, so together victory should be certain, BUT can I backstab my AI Ally and try to win all alone? (Especially, if I'm evil?) Actually, I would expect alliances of evil to be fragile, for example, Hitler and Stalin. Would an Allied AI notice a buildup of forces on its border?