I Think, Therefore I Am
#64
Posted 13 March 2011 - 09:56 PM
#66
Posted 24 May 2011 - 09:46 PM
We are currently testing the beta, and making the final touches on developments - so it's almost there. PR is tweaking and nudging tiny bits of the mod every day. After 2 years of development work, there are a LOT of tiny details that need to be checked and polished.
But it's got to be right or there is no point in releasing it.
Hang in there.
Ghost
#73
Posted 10 June 2011 - 04:46 AM
Do you plan on ever increasing the AI's tactical performance?
It's honestly not too bad, really just two changes necessary: it needs to take more mining facilities, especially the one sitting right next to its base that it's meant to take and it needs to stop bringing in ships in the exact same place, especially when an enemy fleet is sitting right there.
#75
Posted 10 June 2011 - 06:29 AM
Do you plan on ever increasing the AI's tactical performance?
It's honestly not too bad, really just two changes necessary: it needs to take more mining facilities, especially the one sitting right next to its base that it's meant to take and it needs to stop bringing in ships in the exact same place, especially when an enemy fleet is sitting right there.
And it needs to use more than 10% of the available unit selection, however I think that will be fixed with this release.
#76
Posted 10 June 2011 - 07:03 AM
Do you plan on ever increasing the AI's tactical performance?
It's honestly not too bad, really just two changes necessary: it needs to take more mining facilities, especially the one sitting right next to its base that it's meant to take and it needs to stop bringing in ships in the exact same place, especially when an enemy fleet is sitting right there.
And it needs to use more than 10% of the available unit selection, however I think that will be fixed with this release.
I find that my ai does take a while to tech up, but after it does it utilizes a fair variety of ships. It just tends to sit on Tier 1 Cruisers and Frigates for a long time. Later though, I've faced Imperial and Tector Star Destroyers and both types of Mon Calamari Cruisers from the ARR.
Edit: I'm talking only about Skirmish, I'm not sure if you're talking about GC.
Edited by Stormhawk, 10 June 2011 - 07:05 AM.
#77
Posted 10 June 2011 - 11:40 PM
#78
Posted 11 June 2011 - 03:25 AM
Personally I was talking about tactical for GC, not skirmish. And PR, What I meant was if you had any plans to increase its performance for a later release. Although with its new GC performance i'm not sure if a good tactical AI would be beatable. Unless there are different levels of difficulty, but I think I remember you mentioning that there aren't.
I don't think the ai can be improved to the point that it's unbeatable. Given reasonably balences starting planets and positions, I'm confident of my ability to beat any non-cheating ai.
#79
Posted 11 June 2011 - 05:05 AM
Personally I was talking about tactical for GC, not skirmish. And PR, What I meant was if you had any plans to increase its performance for a later release. Although with its new GC performance i'm not sure if a good tactical AI would be beatable. Unless there are different levels of difficulty, but I think I remember you mentioning that there aren't.
I don't think the ai can be improved to the point that it's unbeatable. Given reasonably balences starting planets and positions, I'm confident of my ability to beat any non-cheating ai.
I'm not.
Back to the AI unit thing, I was mostly talking about skirmish, and actually the AI warped in a Praetor on me yesterday. 0_0. Granted it came in right where my entire fleet was so it got demolished instantly... but it was still cool.
#80
Posted 11 June 2011 - 07:47 AM
That is the idea.And PR, What I meant was if you had any plans to increase its performance for a later release.
There are minor differences, mostly affecting galactic.Unless there are different levels of difficulty, but I think I remember you mentioning that there aren't.
Reply to this topic
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users