Beta patch seem "unethical"

[happyscrub]

"Made AI a bit less maniacal about stomping out every iota of crime to allow the criminal megacorp playstyle"

It's intentionally making the AI dumb in order to make the playstyle (a recent DLC at that) more viable?


How yal feel about it?

 

[InvisibleBison]

I think that making the AI build as many crime-suppressing buildings as it needs and no more is a good idea. I've seen plenty of planets where the net crime was somewhere around -250 to -300, which is just a waste of pops and building slots.

 

[stilgarpl]

I don't think it makes AI dumber. Maybe now AI tried filling every building slot with enforcer building if it had any crime. That would be dumb. Some production building and a little crime May give them better economy

 

[Surimi]

I mean, technically it probably makes the AI better.

Devoting huge resources to fighting crime simply isn't worth it compared to just living with it or even cutting a deal with the criminals. Before, people were reporting that the AI was constantly building loads of anti-crime buildings just to squash every last point of crime. That's not really the AI being smart, it's actually kind of dumb.

 

[HisRotundity]

I'm not sure if you were aware, but the AI was already dumb in a different way: it would build Precinct Offices infinitely so long as there was any crime on the planet, leading to both a severely underdeveloped AI along with unfun Criminal play. The real benefit of playing as a criminal megacorp wasn't actually the branch offices you built, because they'd be shut down immediately, but rather the fact that you could cripple the AI using its own poor decision-making.

 

[GoldenSilver]

I don't know how it was or how it's like now since I didn't play as a crime syndicate yet, but maybe they could just base it more on the empire personality or something. An empire that is of Democratic Crusaders type could be more aggressive against crime or something like that.

Also the fact that a precint costs 1 building slot is something that they could build on that slot to benefit their economy so it's not always a loss.

 

[DeadEyeTucker]

If it means they don't fill their planet up with precincts, then I feel great about it.

 

[AlphaAsh]

"Made AI a bit less maniacal about stomping out every iota of crime to allow the criminal megacorp playstyle"

It's intentionally making the AI dumb in order to make the playstyle (a recent DLC at that) more viable?


How yal feel about it?

I feel you're reading too much into a needed bug fix.

 

[3Dent]

The point of the video game AI isn't to win at all costs but to act in a way that makes the game entertaining. Which means not too easy, not to difficult, not to obvious and not completely unintelligible, but just right. Which is a much bigger challenge.

And, as everyone said, AI really obviously over-spent on precincts.

 

[Greene]

no this is very much needed othetwise the dumb AI kills its own economy by building nothing else than precincts

 

[Secret Master]

no this is very much needed othetwise the dumb AI kills its own economy by building nothing else than precincts

This.

I've conquered some planets in my first game that made me go "Huh? WTF is the AI doing?" One precinct is enough in 99% of situations.

Maybe not even that if you have a penal colony and some other stuff nerfing crime. Hell, my fanatic authoritarian empire has no crime on any planet and not all planets have precinct houses... except for my resort world. Because I want all my drugs and prostitution and other things the dystopian government I run outlaws to be "available" in one place for my POPs to indulge.

 

[wormasc]

The AI still builds precincts to fight crime, anyway.

I think crime needs some much more dramatic adjustments to how it works because the system right now doesn't really work well with factions that want to cause crime, but given the amount of other stuff that needs working on I'm not particularly bothered that a measure like this is implemented in the mean time

 

[Less2]

If it means the AI is better at competing against the 98% of empires that aren't criminal syndicates then I'd say its a good tradeoff.

That said I really don't have an understanding of crime and exactly how much damage it does. The mechanics appear very vague and require game file dissection.

 

[3Dent]

Also the thing I noticed when looking at my current 2.2.0 game - The AI paves the planet with precincts even when the real problem isn't so much crime as such as stability, and could have been better solved by building up jobs, housing, etc, rather than precincts.

Yet, all it sees is the high crime, and it ends up with a precinct-paved planets that rebel anyway. (and then are crippled by precincts in the same way.)

The planet in the screenshot once belonged to the starting AI, then it had an AI uprising of rogue servitors (which I just for fun supported with trade deals, then outright cheated to give it victory, to see what happens.) Servitors, even with my helicopter drops, didn't build domes, so I again cheated, and built some on some of their planets. This was one of those planets where I didn't...

They had 2 rebellions so far, one that freed them from the RS empire, and one against the former rebels... While fun to watch, it's obvious that that's not what a good AI should have done.

 

[Ezumiyr]

An empire that is of Democratic Crusaders type could be more aggressive against crime or something like that.

Why would Democratic Crusader fight crime harder than Honourbound Warriors or Hegemonic Imperialists, though? Most AI personalities have good reasons to actively fight crime, with the exception of Decadent Hierarchy. The exact reason why each empire fights crime may vary, but all in all they all have good reasons:
Democratic crusaders because crime is another form of servitude
Honorbound warriors because crime is shameful and makes warriors go lenient
Hegemonic Imperialists because crime lords are rivals for power
Xenophobic Isolationists because crime is xeno-induced
Harmonius collective because crime troubles harmony
and even Decadent Hierarchy because the only accepted crime is state crime, in a way

Also, there's no empire benefitting from crime within its own borders. No if we had (finally!) more AI personalities, then yes it could be a nice thing to add. But currently I don't think more granularity is needed.

 

[Snoipah]

This is before the fix.

 

[Eled the Worm Tamer]

Crime as a whole is a mess I've never built a precint and never had so much as a % of criminality

 

[Snoipah]

Crime as a whole is a mess I've never built a precint and never had so much as a % of criminality

Make a ecumonpolis(however it is spelled) that focuses on alloys entirely and you'll get crime. Also, make a game with syndicates and you'll get crime.

 

[Mavkiel]

"Made AI a bit less maniacal about stomping out every iota of crime to allow the criminal megacorp playstyle"

It's intentionally making the AI dumb in order to make the playstyle (a recent DLC at that) more viable?


How yal feel about it?

Seriously did you ever play as one of those megacorps? The AI spammed enforcement buildings to counter any crime. This didn't just make criminal branches impossible but also gutted the AI long term.

 

[Eled the Worm Tamer]

Make a ecumonpolis(however it is spelled) that focuses on alloys entirely and you'll get crime. Also, make a game with syndicates and you'll get crime.

Theres3 criminal empires but I'm a Mega Corp. As for the other optoin. If the only way to get crime "natavely" is to deliberately build a particular kind of world badly thatskind of making my point that the whole crime subsystems need a look, no? If theres no natave crime arrising theres nothing for Criminal empires to take advantage of. Balance from crime instance to its effects, to the responce is all out of whack.