Does the a.i. cheat?

[seattle]

In my current game as Germany, I managed to starve Britain and Soviet Union (2nd war after Bitter Peace).

Both lack resources (rare or metal) to maintain their economy, so IC is mostly at 0. When I load the save game as either, I start with 0 dissent. When I let a couple of days pass the lack of consumer goods nets me a handy dissent immediately.

I mean, the save game starts with 0 IC which also means 0 consumer goods. How come it doesn't affect the a.i.?

Is it blatantly cheating? If so, why didn't the developers mention it? Can it be fixed?

 

[unmerged(42723)]

Personally I don't care if it's cheating and don't want it to be 'fixed' if that means the AI performs worse.

 

[DesertSnow]

Did you check their bank account? If they still have cash, we don't need to build consumer goods to avoid dissent.

Also: check the difficulty settings. I (want to) believe that all AI bonuses are mentioned there for each difficulty level...

 

[III.Selim]

personally i don't care if it's cheating and don't want it to be 'fixed' if that means the ai performs worse.

+1

 

[DesertSnow]

Personally I don't care if it's cheating and don't want it to be 'fixed' if that means the AI performs worse.

-1

I want the AI to follow the same rules as the player. If I want a challenge, i can always change the difficulty settings and give them a 50% bonus to the IC or sth...

 

[Rhedd]

Like DesertSnow said, in AoD consumer goods don't reduce dissent, they just make money. Then that money can be spent on reducing dissent. So, if a country has money, it can spend it to keep its dissent down even if it's not producing any consumer goods.

Of course, the practice of spending money without making money can't go on forever! ^_^ (Although they could be trading for money.)

And I think that in a game like this, you CAN'T have an AI that cheats, because the game is all about strategy, and that goes out the window when the AI is operating by different rules. (Like unlimited naval ranges! Glad that's a thing of the past.)

 

[Titan79]

And I think that in a game like this, you CAN'T have an AI that cheats, because the game is all about strategy, and that goes out the window when the AI is operating by different rules. (Like unlimited naval ranges! Glad that's a thing of the past.)

+1.

Sure the AI could from time to time need some "help" (although I'd like to have this limited to the bare, necessary minimum), but things like unlimited naval range were definitely game breakers IMHO. They completely ruin the "atmosphere" it's being created when you play.

 

[robinfisichella]

I know the ai cheats in another way, its ships allways attack me way out of their crusing range, sometimes by 3 or 4 k! Been an issue since hoi2, but i used to get pissed of and go and delete there fleets!:rofl:

 

[Titan79]

I know the ai cheats in another way, its ships allways attack me way out of their crusing range, sometimes by 3 or 4 k! Been an issue since hoi2, but i used to get pissed of and go and delete there fleets!:rofl:

That's quite odd. I thought this had been fixed - are you sure they're really out of range? Remember that for the AI it's enough to have at least one allied port within range to let its ships move/attack you, even if those ships start from a farther distance (AFAIK).

 

[robinfisichella]

That's quite odd. I thought this had been fixed - are you sure they're really out of range? Remember that for the AI it's enough to have at least one allied port within range to let its ships move/attack you, even if those ships start from a farther distance (AFAIK).

To be fair im not exactly sure as i cant check wear its port was, all i know is that (playing as Australia) i had ships in the southern part (near Tazmania) and carrier fleets (15 ships comprised of destroyers and capitals so mixed ranges allways go to the ship with the least range) spotting me (somehow????????) and coming out of port in Hawaii all the way to come and sink my transport fleets.

1. The ai should not be able to just 'spot' me if its not even on patrol in the area AND IS IN PORT!!!!!

2. Hawaii was about 4-6k away so doubt in 1944 they could do it.

 

[Titan79]

1. The ai should not be able to just 'spot' me if its not even on patrol in the area AND IS IN PORT!!!!!

This is true.

2. Hawaii was about 4-6k away so doubt in 1944 they could do it.

Who did attack you? The Japanese, I suppose?

 

[unmerged(42723)]

-1

I want the AI to follow the same rules as the player. If I want a challenge, i can always change the difficulty settings and give them a 50% bonus to the IC or sth...

Same rules would be nice if we had AIs that are as competent as human players.

 

[robinfisichella]

This is true.


Who did attack you? The Japanese, I suppose?

The US lol

 

[Acheron]

And I think that in a game like this, you CAN'T have an AI that cheats, because the game is all about strategy, and that goes out the window when the AI is operating by different rules. (Like unlimited naval ranges! Glad that's a thing of the past.)

+2
If I go for example for an all out strategic bombing campaign, or sink the enemies merchant fleet down to the last rustbucket, I damn well want the enemy suffering accordingly, not magically being only half-affected by it. boni to production capacity and even production speed are one thing, but complete immunity to a certain kind of warfare is another.
If I cannot cut enemy supply lines or similar things, I might as well play risk

 

[Titan79]

The US lol

Ok, then probably they considered Noumea or Vanua Levu to be their farthest port (remember, it would be eligible if it belonged to any of their allies) thus giving their ships the range to attack you.

 

[robinfisichella]

Ok, then probably they considered Noumea or Vanua Levu to be their farthest port (remember, it would be eligible if it belonged to any of their allies) thus giving their ships the range to attack you.

I controlled both of those and samoa to stop them, trust me there was no allied port within 5k

 

[seattle]

Like DesertSnow said, in AoD consumer goods don't reduce dissent, they just make money. Then that money can be spent on reducing dissent. So, if a country has money, it can spend it to keep its dissent down even if it's not producing any consumer goods.

As I wrote above, the day I take over Britain with that save game, dissent quickly piles up. So the a.i. pretty much has to cheat. How else can you explain that?

 

[DesertSnow]

Check your money. Even if you are not (or your trading AI) using the stored cash to keep dissent at bay, you can't be sure that the "complete" AI wasn't either...

If they do have cash:
1. Write down how much they have and how much they have to spend each day to keep dissent down.
2. Reload as your original country and keep destroying british convoys for another 2-3 months.
3. Save and reload as UK and take a look at the numbers (stored cash, dissent).

I am really looking forward to learning the results of such a test.

 

[seattle]

My fault! Sorry for the confusion.

UK had about 30.000 gold left which must have paid for the consumer goods. I also couldn't reproduce the dissent hit when I took over.

Everything works fine, better than fine even. Better delete this topic as it might give customers the wrong impression.