Are there any reviews available for CoG:EE

[jscott991]

To close out this thread, for those who like me were on the fence, don't purchase this game unless you are prepared to play PBEM almost exclusively, or can tolerate excessive, outlandish, and very noticeable AI cheating on all but the lowest difficulty settings.
 
The AI will receive enormous economic bonuses (we're talking bonuses that produce AI treasuries in the thousands of gold, while the player has a balance in the low hundreds, especially at the start of the game), plus bonuses during combat that I haven't done much research on (but the poster "dude" seems to have).
 
Read threads about the AI gold levels very carefully before purchasing this game and hopefully wait for a credible Web site to call the game and its designers to task for this shortcut.

[Anthropoid]

To build on Jscott's post: indeed, don't buy this game if you actually want to have to learn any complexity, cope with a steep learning curve, or deal with any actual challenges to total victory. There are plenty of 'easy' games out there where victory for the human against AI is more or less assured at all difficulty levels and which have lots more fancy graphics with explosions, and blood and gore [;)]

[jscott991]

You are arguing that a game whose AI requires massive influx of resources to be competitive is somehow more complicated than games that don't take this kind of shortcut (like Galactic Civilizations for one)?
 
It's kind of the opposite.  This level of cheating is only needed in a game looking for a shortcut to a truely satisfying single player experience.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: jscott991
You are arguing that a game whose AI requires massive influx of resources to be competitive is somehow more complicated than games that don't take this kind of shortcut (like Galactic Civilizations for one)?

It's kind of the opposite.  This level of cheating is only needed in a game looking for a shortcut to a truely satisfying single player experience.

That's simply not true. The game does not require those bonuses. Why don't you give it a try at one of the lowest levels without bonuses and see how it does? I think it will still give you a pretty good game.

I think you're jumping to quite a few conclusions for having just started playing the game.

[Anthropoid]

Haven't played Gal Civ, but did hear a buddy at another forum tout it. Is that a really good game?
 
I had the impression it was an MMOG though? Is that not true?
 
Better, even MUCH better AI in human-vs-computer engines out there (e.g., Gal Civ) may well be true. I wouldn't try to argue that the AI in COGEE is 'the best' out there.
 
Given the specific focus of the game, and the small team of guys who have developed it, I'd be surprised if that was the case. In short, I'd guess you are right, and there are better AIs out there.
 
But that is not the point underlying either the theme of your recent posts, nor the explicit message you have chosen to convey (in your signature and in multiple posts that are starting to border on spamming with the same message being conveyed multiple times). The point is not whether COGEE is NOT the best out there; the point is that the COGEE is at least on a par with AI in _many_ comparable games out there and is arguably _better_ than many AIs out there.
 
You are recommending to other gamers that they "not buy" the game cause it "is strictly for PBEM" or that it has a "terrible AI." I am here to disagree with you on that point, and there are a lot of us on here whom I suspect will concur with me, and disagree with you. I'm sure all of us are happy to hear you out, and agree to disagree in a civil way, but it seems to me you are verging over into the 'angry tirade poster' approach, so you might consider that feedback. Sure, the AI in COGEE is less than perfect; I can empathize with some frustration. Heck! I started a thread on here a while back where I complained about how easy it is to capture whole fleets with blockades! It is just that doing it in a way that seems spiteful, rash, or mean spirited to the developers, testers or fan community generally does not go over very well.
 
The fact that there are games in which the engine/topic/design etc. all synergize into a game with an AI that is "better" than the one in COGEE does not make COGEE unworthy of consideration. It simply means that you have jumped quickly to the conclusion that you do not like the game because it does not meet your expectations. Sorry to hear that, but then that happens to all of us from time to time. If you consider some of the suggestions being offered for how to play it differently maybe you can still get some fun out of it after all? Unless of course you are dead set in your conclusion that it is "worthless to you."
 
I bought Age of Empires, installed it, played it for a few hours and then just plain uninstalled and put it on the shelf. I'll probably never play it ever again. Do you see me on the AE sites badmouthing the game? What purpose would that serve exactly?
 
Now if I thought it was a brilliant game design that just needed to be modded, fixed, retooled, etc., and I went on their sites to post lots of criticisms combined with constuctive suggestions that would be something else entirely . . .

[jscott991]

I'm bitter that I purchased the game after doing so much research, without waiting for a proper review, only to discover that something I was fairly certain was not true (the AI cheating on the normal difficulty level) is, in fact, true and that the developer confirmed this in a short post in a thread that I missed.

If I seem like I'm spamming, sorry.  But I won't apologize for making this issue more widely known.  If this were made more clear, I wouldn't own the game and I wouldn't be here "spamming."

The fact is that the documentation and information I could find implied or explicitly stated that bonuses were granted on higher difficulty levels.  I already had qualms about the AI from the Turkey AAR and some other maps where I saw most of Europe conquered in a strange way.  Several posters assured me those results were anomalous, some articulate individuals made great cases for the game, and forum moderators were helpful.  So I took the plunge, when I should have waited. 

In some ways it's my fault for not finding ericbabe's post on cheating.  But I still think that it is not unjustified to feel a bit like this information was concealed unnecessarily.  If the AI required the bonuses on such a plethora of difficulty level, say so.  I'm not the only poster to have only found this out by careful investigation within the game.

Probably shortly, my anger will die down, I'll throw the game aside, and you'll never have to deal with me again (of course, Matrix/WCS will have my money, so they will be the true winners).

Edit: I won't post anymore about this topic here. I will say that I usually don't mind wasting money on strategy games I don't like, because the genre needs support.

[Erik Rutins]

I really, truly don't understand your logic. It's clear that the AI getting some resource bonuses really bothers you, even though that's standard in most strategy games. It's also a fact that there is a level that you can play on where the AI gets no resource bonuses and is still the same AI in other respects. If the resource bonuses are what is getting you worked up, then just play at the lowest level. Problem solved. I'm sorry the documentation didn't make clear which level had no bonuses, but the forum responses have.

If you think we enjoy having unhappy customers, you're wrong. I just wish you'd hear what folks are trying to tell you.

Regards,

- Erik

[jscott991]

I do hear what you are saying, but it's not all that clear, which is partly my fault.
 
1. The AI receives bonuses on all difficulty levels above the lowest, which contrasts with the documentation which states that bonuses occur only above normal.  So, the AI is on an unlevel playing field on all difficulty levels, except one, right?
 
2. The documentation says that the player receives bonuses on levels below normal.  That's pretty typical for a strategy game.  Is that true?
 
If both of those things are true, where is the balanced game?  Where is the game where the AI is operating at the same economic level as me?  It isn't normal, despite the documentation.
 
Is it the easiest level? 

[Mus]

Easiest.

[jscott991]

ORIGINAL: Mus

Easiest.

No, you're wrong.

On Easiest I am receiving huge economic bonuses, just like the AI on normal.

So I ask again, where is the fair game? Where is the game where I'm playing by the same rules as the AI.

There is no fair game is there? On every difficulty level, someone is cheating. The AI cheats on normal. And I'm cheating on Easiest and Easier.

And yet, people are surprised I'm upset over this? I don't know what to say.

[Ugrok]

Just try to play and dont think about it ?

[IronWarrior]

The saddest part about this is that the good guys at WCS are probably going to spend even more time on single player now, which means less time for pbem/mp addons etc. [&:]

[Anthropoid]

There are also power handicap setters.

[jscott991]

Those seem to affect startup forces.  I haven't noticed an economic effect.

[Anthropoid]

Not sure what they affect, but you might try fiddling with them. Have only skimmed the manual. I now the system from FoF and what I didn't know cause its new just sorta figured it out. Bet if you try to figure out the settings/nation/scenario that suits you, you'll figure out a setup that you enjoy! [:)]

[jscott991]

Well, at least you're positive.
 
I don't think I'm going to.  I played around with it for a long time last night, starting the 1803 scenario over repeatedly to figure out the bonuses.
 
I'm getting a pretty major advantage on easier.  And the AI is getting a pretty major advantage on normal.  So there isn't really even a graduated level to these effects.  Its a pretty big jump to go from the baseline + x v. AI baseline on easier to baseline v. AI baseline + x on normal. 
 
Easier is probably the level I should be playing now, because the AI doesn't seem to accumulate the offensive treasury amounts as quickly.  But, frankly, its pretty easy.  I'm not sitting on mountains of gold as Austria (just a few hundred into 1804 in four different playthroughs), but I'm able to build whatever I'd like for the most part.  As Austria in 1803 on normal, I pretty much couldn't build anything except a depot at start.  That's a big difference.  The problem with normal, of course, is that there is no scarcity of resources.  The AI nations have huge treasuries and huge resource surpluses.

[Erik Rutins]

I've asked the developers to comment on the various difficulty level bonuses. Hopefully we'll get a definitive answer this week.

[Gil R.]

We'll respond soon. We haven't yet because 1) it's the weekend, and therefore we're only addressing urgent issues such as support problems, and 2) it's Mother's Day weekend (and at least one of us has, er, mother issues).

[TheOx]

Enjoy your weekend. Happy Mothers Day to all of you and yours.

[Gil R.]

I've just posted a response on this issue in this thread: tm.asp?m=2081636

Let's try to keep any further discussion in that thread, chosen because the title "AI is cheating???" makes it a strong candidate. Much easier to discuss something in one thread instead of four.