...Don't know what game you are playing but against the Drengin at advanced levels they are awesome. Put them in the same galaxy as the Korx where they get lots of money and things certainly get interesting. In my current game the Drengin have gone through six models of their combat vessels so far, responding to every change I have made to my weapons/defense mix within the aforementioned 10-12 turns.
...I am almost up to Quantum torpedoes while the Drengin already have them in my current game. My lead in anti-missile defense is all that gives me any chance at all in this game. The Drengin researched armor tech early on in order to take out the Yor so I am going to play another year or two to see if I can achieve ascendance. Otherwise, it is 'Game Over' and the blessing of a restart.

People play ONE or TWO games and think they know it all how the AI is going to play. Well it ain't that way. When you've played 100 games and they all turn out the same then you have a right to bitch. Until then just because one game became a victory for you doesn't mean "every" game will turn out so well. Each galaxy and each game is different and each outcome can be just as different. So, to OP I suggest you start your 100 game play before bitching anymore.

Apple Juice Overload, what dificulty are you playing, you never said so how do we know your not playing at simple? I bet you are but just won't admit it because you can't play the game and bitch about the AI in simple.

I usually stop when I know I'm going to win, and there's nothing anyone can do about it, or when I know I'm going to lose no matter what I do.

I judge this by how I'm doing in research. If I'm way ahead in research I know I'm going to stomp on everyone's inferior ships. If I'm way behind on research that means I'm behind in everything else too.

I realize what he is saying, mostly because there are races that slide into that pitfall --not adapting their ships-- and lose because of this. The Dregin, and Arceans, and sometimes the Torian or Korax will adapt their ships. But often the other races, like the Humans, and the Yor, and epecially the Thalans seem to fail in that area. This can be offset by other advances, it seems that the Thalans have a very quick planet grabbing effort, and if they fall behind early, they have lost, while the Humans make lots of friends, and if you pick on them, you quickly find yourself in a three front war. (Note: this was on tough) The Yor have yet to even remotely prove themselves, but maybe at a higher difficulty. All and all, I'd say each race AI has its own tweaks and perks. (did I say that right?) If one proves adequate, it might simply be the situation. I dont even place Humans in the game if there are not at least 4 other AIs playing, because they will not present a challange otherwise.

There are often times when the AI is amazingly superior for no apparent reason, this is usually do to things you cannot see, such as a precursor library or something of the nature. This works both ways, if the game isnt very challanging, it might be because of the lack of the AI getting any bonuses. Usually I like to play the game all the way through, just to see what happens. There was even a game where I had been in a war with the Dregin from the begining of the game, had spent all my efforts to finally beat them, controlled 3/5 of the galaxy, and suddenly found the other 2 AI ganging on me. Even though at that point I would have considered it a win (controlling so much of the galaxy (and 3 military resources to boot)) they still proved the better of me, because while I had been fighting my war, they had been researching technologies.

I have never found any of the games I have played to be stereotypical. (There is no point where I can honestly say "it is the begining of the end") When you start to win, the other powers often decide to bring you back down, and while there are some HUGE ways to exploit the AI, they are easy to simply "not do" Besides, exploiting the AI only leads to bad game habits. (Sorry if not all of it is proper english, I'm still learning)

One thing that would help is allowing the AI to design ships more than once a year. That's the current limit as far as I know, and it can make it very hard for the AI to respond. Personally, I would favor allowing the AI to design new ships every 3 months.

I realize what he is saying, mostly because there are races that slide into that pitfall --not adapting their ships-- and lose because of this.

Ok.

A few things...

1) If you are not patched to at LEAST 1.2, or even 1.3(beta), you should NOT POST about AI shortcomings. The AI has been upgraded in each and every patch, and at this point, can whip my butt in about 5 out of 7 games.

2) If you DO NOT turn on Intensive AI (Allow AI to use extra CPU option somewheres on a beginning screen), then please understand that the AI is limited to updating ships once a year (52 turns)! I agree, that was ridiculous. But it was quickly(!) changed. Now, the Drengin will attack me with Missile with no defenses against my beam weapons/missile defense combo. The VERY next fleet to enter my sphere-of-influence has beam defense, with the SAME missile attack. This is within 3 turns, not 50! Of course, they may have just updated the AI to upgrade more often or based on need with one of the patches; but it was at the same time as when the intensive CPU was added.

3) If you DO NOT individually set each AI's intelligence from version 1.2 on back to the release version, there is a bug that will set an AI to completely dumb, or some other lower setting. Repeat: If you use the overall difficulty drop down, the game will set some AI to high intelligence, and some to low, to reach the level of difficulty you've set. Ever since 1.2 came out, and I read that from one of the devs, I manually set each AI player, and now I can barely win a game @ Painful. Not unless I get some resource bonuses and a mining resource or two.

I hope this helps.

-thefinkster

I agree with the original poster, there are a lot of turns between when I know I can't lose, and when I'm awarded a victory. If my economy, tech, and foreign relations are about on par with the top AI's, then I'm going to win. I think Apple Juice Overlord is right about the lack of attrition in combat, successful combat results in powerful snowball effect where you continually get stronger as you defeat your enemies. Mainly, offensive warfare is too easy and too profitable.

If you have a decent advantage in tech or weapon/armor type, you can win a war with very few losses. And the planets you conquer become profitable quite quickly, so that you are stronger at the end of the war than you were at the beginning. After a winning war, you are closer to winning the game (because there are fewer planets left to conquer), and farther away from losing (because your civ is stronger). If wars were more mutually destructive, then winning a war would put you closer to winning, but also closer to losing because you weakened your civ in the fight. That sounds more exciting to me than continually getting stronger.

In order to make wars more mutually destructive, I think there should be more bonuses for fighting defensively, so that a weaker civ could do some damage to a stronger civ that is attacking it. Also, make it so that it takes longer for conquered planets to become useful. The end result is that it would force you to make a decision between destroying an enemy, and strengthening your own civ.

I upgrade my ships constantly. If the AI upgrades only once a year then they'll never keep up.