Impressed with the AI in Diplomacy

Yeah I haven't had Diplomacy long but I like the new A.I. as well as I really only play SP.

Wow this is like the first time I have heard that the AI doesn't suck

GJ Ironclad

The Advent AI is still worthless due to the homing mine issue, and Visari still doesn't know what to do about a starbase.  TEC and Visari put up a lot more of fight mid-late game now though thanks to teching better, but in general you still have to put the AIs on a cheating difficultly to get any challenge out of them.

Before you could ignore the AI with little consequence--now it at least has to be watched.  The best thing with Diplomacy so far for me is the AI improvement.  I am also finding (over the long haul) that the diplomatic possibilities are very subtle and layered.  really well done but take awhile to be understood and seen.  The more you play, the more you see the versatility.

Is the AI tougher because it makes better strategic decisions and starts out on an equal playing field (like a real human opponent) or is it tougher becasue it has all sorts of artificial buffs (twice your income, etc.)?

It's certainly very possible to design an overpowering AI by buffing it up, but I've always found that to feel rather artificial.  I mean, the strategy of the game degrades into: "How do I survive against this overpowered opponent that's really stupid?"  In contrast, playing against human opponents in online multiplayer is more about: "How do I beat this guy in a Sins chess match?"

I can see how playing against the dumb overpowered opponent could be fun.  Certainly a type of strategy is involved.  I also enjoy playing an FPS shooting gallery type of game in Unreal Tournament 2004 called Invasion Monster Hunt RPG.  However, neither game is the same as playing against cunning human opponents (say UT99 capture-the-flag on a public server or organized pug match) who are actually trying to outsmart and outplay you and not merely use mindless brute strength.

the AI never starts out on an equal playing field, but I do see better strategic decisions and better ship building patterns aka more capital ships

you know and so does everyone else that the AI cant replace the human thought patterns

but the AI also does not rage quit or bar you from playing because not enough/too much experience

Didn't somebody complain that the AI was building too few capital ships in another thread?

I think that the smarter thing for the AI would be to build fewer capital ships and more LRFs and Heavy Cruisers since it doesn't manage its capital ships very well.  Focus firing upon and knocking down AI controlled capital ships is like child's play.  The AI might be better off just building two motherships to be accompanied by a small fleet of 8 light frigates or LRFs for colonization purposes and to then build a large fleet of LRFs, Heavy Cruisers, Flaks, and Support Cruisers without capital ships for combat.

The AI does read what you're building and try to build a counter-fleet now.  I had a fleet of HCs, flak and support one game.  Sent a scout to see what the AI nearest to me had, and it had a fleet of all LFs and carriers.  So they DO at least try to adapt to a player massing one or two unit types now.  They also have a much higher tolerance for retreating now, and won't flee just because you have 10% more ships than them now.

I'm surprised no one ever made an AI mod for the game, seeing as single player is the most popular mode of play.  Are the AI behaviors buried too deep in the code to change?

yes, AI code is hard coded, we tried in Distant Stars to mod it with only minor effects (basic gameplayconstant file only)