ORIGINAL: BoredStiff
And that's about all a person can say in regard to the constant whining about bad AI's.
The worst part of it is, that developers might sometimes not implement certain features of a game because it might be too difficult (or impossible) to program the AI for it. In other words, an aspect of a game that might work very well in regard to PBEM play might be compromised, or even left out altogether, because AI would not be able to adequately follow the routine.
IMO, wargames, especially those for more than two people, should be designed strictly with human-to-human play (PBEM, TCP/IP, hot seat) in mind, with the AI added as an afterthought and mainly as a teaching/practicing aid and nothing more.
PBEM wargamers are a distinct minority. They, at least those that play monster games like WitP, are akin to those that played chess via the mail when I was a kid. Nothing wrong with that of course but it's not a group you can make a living catering to. So wargame publishers further shrinking their already relatively small customer base would be the final nail in the coffin.
However, if that's what a company chooses to do, that's fine by me. I'd rather see a game released as "2+ players" only, then buy a game like WitP and then be told after the fact that the AI is for "training purposes". Especially when even that is false, unless your PBEM opponent is too dumb to even refuel his task forces or send damaged ships back to port, there's not much training value.
The beauty of computer games for me was that they came with a built-in opponent. As opposed to my beautiful board games that none of my friends were interested in playing.
