Don't base AI unit level on the highest player unit

Unfortunately am short on time right now, but really feel this needs to be covered. (As I've heard complaints and feedback from many other players as well on this topic).

I think the process whereby the final level of the units in the AI's army composition is based on the players highest unit in his army is flawed, and it needs to be looked into to come up with a better way of calculating AI army levels.

This causes problems when one unit is or becomes higher than the rest of your army for whatever reason. It makes having a higher level unit in your army actually a detriment to your chance of victory by making battles significantly harder.

The below information may or may not be correct: (Devs will need to confirm).

Quote :

Normal Difficulty
Range of AI levels: Min 2 / Max 10 (Random level depending on the level of the player's highest unit level ranging from -2 to 0)

Hard Difficulty
Range of AI levels: Min 5 / Max 15 (Random level depending on the level of the player's highest unit level ranging from -2 to +1)

Nightmare Difficulty
Range of AI levels: Min 9 / Max 20 (Random level depending on the level of the player's highest unit level ranging from +1 to +2)

Insane Difficulty
Range of AI levels: Min 13 / Max '???' (Random level depending on the level of the player's highest unit level ranging from +1 to +3)

Suicide Difficulty
???????

I feel AI unit levels should be based more on a mean average of your army or some other more appropriate calculation (still taking into account min/max level ranges based on difficulty).

The current system does not seem logical, and is not conducive to 'fun' when you need to micro-manage the experience gain of your units to ensure your army isn't somehow matched up against a far superior force simply because one unit is higher than the rest.

To illustrate this point, I can run Suicide missions with 1 army setup, and it be FAR easier with MORE rewards than running an Insane mission with a higher level unit. In what planet should Insane be HARDER than Suicide simply due to the change of a single unit in my force?

There has to be a better way?

I like it the way it is. I can bring new recruits into battle and let them kill off weaker high lvl units. Don't change a thing about that.

Suicide is always+2 levels for every Ai unit btw.

Claudandus wrote:

I like it the way it is. I can bring new recruits into battle and let them kill off weaker high lvl units. Don't change a thing about that.

How will this change that at all?

Agree with you, XV. There has to be a better way of calculating AI-levels. I'd go for the average of your troops' levels too.

If the average of all units brought to battle is the reference to calculate ai lvl, i wont get as much xp from a battle. Why would you want to take my precious xp away?

Claudandus wrote:

If the average of all units brought to battle is the reference to calculate ai lvl, i wont get as much xp from a battle. Why would you want to take my precious xp away?

You're really not making any sense.....

XViper wrote:

Claudandus wrote:

If the average of all units brought to battle is the reference to calculate ai lvl, i wont get as much xp from a battle. Why would you want to take my precious xp away?

You're really not making any sense.....

He is saying enemy levels will be lower, thus his experience will be lower.

My opinion is it should average the experience amount of all the units, and make the base level to make the enemy levels off of that. That way level 1 units won't effect the formula as much. So 2 level 1 units and 8 level 15 units might get like level 13 or 14 as the base level.

That sounds good as well Bobba.

I certainly wouldn't want very low level units to factor into the AI's levels.

Maybe even something like you use the average of 80% of your armies AP\Experience to determine the levels of the AI army. So someone who brings a few level 1 units won't notice any difference.

Wasn't aware that i am in need of a translator. But thx bobba. Btw still against it.

I think this is a great idea. I see far too many newbies getting slaughtered by units that are way higher level than them in coops. This happens frequently when a high level player coops with a low level player and I think it chases some new players away from the game.

Averaging out the experience would give these newbies more of a fighting chance.

If you consider implementing this for coops only where lvl difference can be huge for noobs. I wouldn't be against it.

I think it's a very good suggestion, and would like to see it for both coop and singles. Even more for singles than coops, actually.

Singles are important because they allow a player to work their unit independently and how they please, and without being forced to take the constant repair-preventing gold-loss that now occurs while playing with higher-leveled people.

Singles are also where the current risk of death to the whole army is highest right now,for example when there are several units still mid-level and a very new one, as well as some older high-level LI. Since the game tends to very much overmatch them in number AND level, it can get pretty gnarly. Even more so when people are still at the seven or eight unit limit, there is a lot less buffer than with bigger armies.

I think XViper's suggestion with the 80% would work well to take out the pressure on lowest level without punishing players like Claudandus.

I'm wanting to revisit this again.
Not sure if any Dev's have had a chance to see this, or missed it entirely?

Due to the configuration of my army, my Insanes are now harder than my Suicides.
I can bring LESS AP to an Insane battle and get MORE AI AP than in my Suicide battle, simply because I have a high level Cav.

A few suggestions have been made above. Please consider these.

Basing the AI levels on your highest level is just not a good idea.