Community Rejected Not-so-great City "Defense" AI

[The Froggle]

This seems to be a pretty common issue: I was just attacked by 1 IFV, 1 Commando and 6 Rogues. Now, I've been in this game long enough that I know the best strategy is to take out all the regular units first. Then the Rogues are easy to 1-shot. Even with a several hundred % gap between my defending army & the attacking one, there's absolutely no way this shouldn't work.
The AI has other ideas, however. It takes out the Rogues first, and they, of course, turn into the highest level attacking soldiers (which wastes an entire turn for my troops) and proceed to devastate my army-attackers had "zero" fatalities (even though the Rogues were supposedly killed off) and my entire force was obliterated. This totally sucks. Of course, the attack/plunder is really just a minor inconvenience. It doesn't really kill off the defending army; it's still there the next attack. And the plunder costs some small part of goods, products or coins. But it's really irritating when my troops could win a battle handily, and the AI just essentially sends them on a suicide mission.
It seems like an easy change to make: If the attacking army is 1/2 Rogues or more, for instance, AI goes after the regular troops first. Is this a possible change that can be made?
[edit] I realize that this is really just a problem for relatively new players. But as someone posted on another thread, all of us were new once.

 

[Ebeondi Asi]

I see this as a new player vs veteran problem. All new players will vote yes, as they have no understanding of the history of Plundering and how it's a basic part of the games. Where long time veterans who grew up in the game plundering like crazy just laugh. Becasue the real question and demand is not about the actual way the City defense AI is set up. the real complaint is getting plundered.
I definitely think even asking this shows an error in what is allowed to be asked. Mainly as it is the new players who whine endlessly about this. and they got the GT Great Building already. Changing how the City Defense works just adds to the new player wanting to be invincible, instead of them having to grow their city and work at getting better. It would just make new players even more complacent and lazy.
So if they got this too, the they would have the same reaction later on to sniping. and whine endlessly about sniping.. Until eventually the game is changed to be a Foe version of "Chutes and Ladders" instead of Forge Of Empires.
So i say draw a line in the sand at this spot and "go no further" in appeasing new players.

And I do not say that because I like to plunder. I really never do.
Also this would only make sense if the GT were seriously nerfed ? As it is the game has always been geared to plunder, and only the recent constant whine about 'getting plundered' has changed the game already. So I am voting no on this l. Getting attacked does not bother me, If some player can get a few Coins off a Royal marble gate I do not care.
I do care about not making the game too "safe' and everyone gets a trophy attitude. This is a game about winning. No participation Trophies !!!!

 

[PJS299]

I didn't understand what you were saying at first, but after reading it through a few times I understand. This person that you are talking about possibly could of used manual instead of auto battle? I like this idea, but then always somebody could do manual battle and bypass the AI, and put their rogues against regular units... Will pass for voting for now as I can see how it could be frustrating...

 

[Sharmon the Impaler]

Voted no , that’s a major shift after a decade of defence AI being lame. It’s a massive defence boost with zero effort to get it except whining about it. Just no.

 

[Ironrooster]

I don't worry about being plundered, but I like this idea.

Only let's include all the AI battles - GBG, PVP, GE, Quests, etc. That will make the game more challenging.

 

[Ebeondi Asi]

I don't worry about being plundered, but I like this idea.

Only let's include all the AI battles - GBG, PVP, GE, Quests, etc. That will make the game more challenging.

To mention.. this particular extension would affect the attacker (Who is you by the way) negatively. Just so players understand what is being suggested
It is most likely a snarky reply, rather than a serious one. Though it may be meant seriously. it is still snarky LOL

 

[Ironrooster]

To mention.. this particular extension would affect the attacker (Who is you by the way) negatively. Just so players understand what is being suggested
It is most likely a snarky reply, rather than a serious one. Though it may be meant seriously. it is still snarky LOL

Actually, I meant it seriously. Yes it would affect the attacker, that's the whole point in doing it. The so called "fighting" in this game is pretty boring when you can just toss in a bunch of rogues with a couple of real units and win on auto battle.

 

[Sharmon the Impaler]

Actually, I meant it seriously. Yes it would affect the attacker, that's the whole point in doing it. The so called "fighting" in this game is pretty boring when you can just toss in a bunch of rogues with a couple of real units and win on auto battle.

The AB attack AI really sucks as it is , may as well remove AB and see GbG and PvP Arena bottom out. Who has time for hundreds of manual fights per day ?

 

[Ironrooster]

The AB attack AI really sucks as it is , may as well remove AB and see GbG and PvP Arena bottom out. Who has time for hundreds of manual fights per day ?

You could still do some AB, but you would have to spend a little time picking your troops for each battle, especially as the defensive army boosts increase. True, you might have to manual battle more, but that would make the game more interesting.

 

[Sharmon the Impaler]

You never played chess against a computer have you ? There is a limited number of moves you can make out of a known set of moves. You are playing against an algorithm that is as good as the hardware that hosts it. If it’s sitting on a Synergy frame with a 25-30 cores dedicated to calculations then luck will not help , you will lose. GbG is not a battle , it’s clicking a mouse then waiting for the server’s chosen response in the form of moves which are visually depicted as battle/chess pieces. Dunning - Kruger is real and many of the players here think that they are a match against a well programmed Xeon.

 

[DevaCat]

I’m a no to this as well, reasons given above will suffice. I do have to wonder why something like this is making it to the voting stage rather than being DSLd, but it’s the new system I guess.

 

[Tony 85 the Generous]

I'm voting no as the defense AI is only a small part of the computer driven fighting system. This is focused on the defense AI. What about the opponent AI (which could be considered defense AI in a way)? What about the player side (auto-battle) AI? I fight with 1 champion and 7 rogues. If I autobattle then the computer moves the champion out first and then the rogues are killed off. With my current attacking army attck/defense boost I can use that matchup through all of GE and never lose one troop if initiate a manual battle to skip the champion's first round attack then I can let the computer autobattle and win all 64 levels of GE never losing one troop. Another option would be to allow the player side to designate which order the troops are used when defending your city or in an auto battle attack.

Sorry OP, but this idea is too narrow and has too many other aspects which need to be addressed at the same time which are not included in the idea.

 

[Zadok of Dingleron]

I vote yes. This change would not produce a batch of complacent and lazy new players. New players will still have to develop their cities and their skills to be able to survive in battle as the defender, as their preparation is the only thing they have going for them. The defender is stuck with the AI algorithm in battle, unable to adjust to the force fielded by the attacker or develop a new strategy on the fly. The players that will be affected are the complacent and lazy attackers that want to field the same force of rogues time after time, pushing the AB button knowing that they can’t lose due to an algorithm biased to the attacker. Imagine having to plan your army, develop a strategy, and successfully implement it in battle in order to win! The whining I’m hearing is from a long time player that wants his win with no effort every time he pushes the attack button. Talk about your participation trophy! You’ve earned nothing, you just got a treat for showing up. This has nothing to do with plunder. If you beat my forces in a fair fight it’s your right to enjoy the spoils. If, however, your whole game plan relies on you exploiting a software issue that allows you to get ahead with little effort or risk, you aren’t here to play the game, you are here for an instant gratification fix and a cheap ego boost.

edit: spelling

 

[Tannerite2]

I voted no because the AI works the same for both parties right now. If you put 6 rogues in defense and your attacker autobattles the fight (which most people probably do) then their units will target your rogues first, just like your units target your attacker's rogues. There is no imbalance here in how the AI works for neighborhood fights

Now if an attacker manually fights, they have an advantage, but they'll have an advantage regardless of whether the defensive AI uses the PvP AI or the continent map AI, both are bad.

But the counter to that is collecting on time. If you collect on time, then it's impossible for anyone to plunder you. And if you're late to collect, but have a GT, then there's a good chance they won't be able to plunder you despite catching you slacking. Or, you could have city with only buildings that can be motivated and a large active friends list and guild that make it impossible to plunder you because everything has been motivated. Or you could use a mass self aid kit every day. This game is already geared so much in the defender's favor, there's not need to give them another advantage.

I wish yall could have played Grepolis (another InnoGames game that was huge back in the day) Here players complain about losing a few FP or some goods. On Grepolis, you could take people's cities and kick them off a world, lol. Now that was satisfying