Matrix Games Forums

OK, I can understand that you may not have played Sid Meier's Gettysburg game or Antietam and Waterloo (ALL RTS), all these games were excellent and probably the best made to date IMO of RTS and with a highly commendable AI. Why he gave up on these stand alone battle type games eludes me to this day for they were the best? Each game came out a little more polished than the next. The last one released was Austerlitz, a fantastic game, but he was not so directly involved with it, then the series ended, all too sadly...

I was easily convinced that I should give them a try.
Any other suggestions are welcome.

ORIGINAL: operating

OK, I can understand that you may not have played Sid Meier's Gettysburg game or Antietam and Waterloo (ALL RTS), all these games were excellent and probably the best made to date IMO of RTS and with a highly commendable AI. Why he gave up on these stand alone battle type games eludes me to this day for they were the best? Each game came out a little more polished than the next. The last one released was Austerlitz, a fantastic game, but he was not so directly involved with it, then the series ended, all too sadly...

Norbsoft and others have beaten him out on most of those now. They are outdated (especially the graphics) and between Norbsoft and LnL Publishing for command and control games there are just no others as good these days.

What was unique about the Sid Meier's games was: After awhile a SP player could do a game save (let's say as the French), then restart the gamesave as The English complete with the OOB and statistics and finish the scenario. I don't think that can be done with a Norb Timko game, Although IIRC when Mad Minute Games did with "Take Command 2nd Manassas", a SP player could switch sides anytime during the game, but with later games Norb created, you could not, it's been a few years since being in touch with him or playing his RTS games. Sid Meier's stand alone battle games were released somewhere between 1998 and 2002. Come to think of it: I just might part with a few bucks and get the "NEW" Waterloo game by Scourge of War, just to see if it has the appeal of the older Sid Meier's Waterloo. French massed artillery at Waterloo was awesome!

Where's Gouchy? One of my favorites[;)]

ORIGINAL: operating

ORIGINAL: CGGrognard

Just jumping on this thread concerning AI in games with a thought. I'm not certain how feasible it would be, but consider a developer collecting moves of players during an online session to build a more robust AI. Or, perhaps in single player, the game could connect to a server to stream strategies (from saved files) from multiplayer games.

Wouldn't this AI information "sponge" also be receiving bad strategies and tactics and not knowing the difference between bad and good and the other side of good to one player might be bad to another player, it certainly would be interesting how this sponge would interpret everything being thrown at it, it could up in an asylum. [&:]

Yes it would, but it may reflect more of reality than we assume. Not every campaign, battle, etc. was well executed. In fact some battles that history shows as a "good" strategy was only that because the other side had a "bad" strategy.

Don't take this as personal: I'd rather see an AI get better, "not worse"...