MZM7 wrote:
I'm not entirely sure if this is meant to be a response to my points or not, but I'll continue as if it is, since it seems to be directed at those who hold the same position as me:
MZM7 wrote:
Is it even good gameplay for a former ally to suddenly switch sides without having to be cleverly persuaded or forced by enemy players? I'm talking of course about a coalition mate (perhaps even a fellow alliance member) goes inactive, and the AI proceeds by declaring war on their former ally. Sure, much of the responsibility falls on the guy who went inactive, but the person receiving negative consequences for the inactivity is the one who's still active, and has to fight enemy players, and a perfectly placed AI enemy.
MZM7 wrote:
If you actually read my post, you'd know that in my Finland game, I used the diplomatic channels, never engaged in any surprise wars, and was actually attacked by two players in a row.. yet AI's declared war on me.
MZM7 wrote:
This isn't about handing downgraded Elite AI, so I'm not sure why the insult was seen as clever or necessary.
You can find out more about popularity with AI in this guide: Popularity with Elite AI
BMfox
Moderator
EN Community Support | Bytro Gmbh
Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/BMfoxCallofWar
Found a bug or need help? Send a ticket here!
Moderator
EN Community Support | Bytro Gmbh
Check out my YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/BMfoxCallofWar
Found a bug or need help? Send a ticket here!