Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Not indisputable as I vehemently dispute it.
Because what you say is untrue.
When BB1 was released back in 2009 the AI was so bad that it became a centerpiece for the ridicule of the community. There was the "snotling challenge" that many of us engaged in which involved running a flawless single player campaign all the way to the cup using an ogre team comprised of nothing but snotlings (it wasn't really a challenge - anyone who understood the rules could do it pretty easily).
The community consensus of the time (and, really, still today) was that the AI was more of a challenge on lower difficulties, which meant the actual AI was so bad that having it randomly make choices in contradiction to what it believed to be the optimal path... actually made it play better.
The community eventually took to messing with the numbers in the XML config files to try to find a better set of configuration variables for the single player AI... and we did the best we could.... which led to Cyanide replacing their own numbers with ours, and making the game give AI teams a couple hundred points of TV advantage in the hopes of providing a mechanical challenge where a strategic challenge was missing.
When BB2 came out they had promised improved AI, and an AI that would take into account roster differences (BB1's AI did not play rosters any differently from each other). The perception at the time was that BB2's AI was an improvement over BB1's - that's the perception of people who had actually been playing BB1's AI and were now playing the new BB2 AI - but was still pretty dismal. In BB2 it was no longer possible for the community to mess with the numbers, so it was just what it was.
Both are absolute trash. Just total garbage. They present no challenge to anyone who has even basic competence.
That's to your standard in my opinion which it is my opinion all AI's are absolute crap in every version of the digital game. the reason being is its too hard to code every possible combination of player for Blood Bowl so the AI is not gonna know if thats a kill piece a scorer etc. I do agree tha the AI is slightly better than BB2 and BB3 for BB1 but its still crap overall to my standard.
best thing to do is try all version for yourself and make ya own mind up if they are good or not.
i think you are missing the point man this game was designed from a table top game called BB and you play against other players that are human coaches, The AI for BB1 is absolute crap and has always been crap, once you get good at the game, you will wanna play against worthy foes so that's where Match maker or ladder for BB2 or BB3 comes in or private league, for real good competitive coaches. tho there is a place for AI leagues etc for those learning the game etc but once you get to grips with the rules teams etc, then you will turn to multiplayer eventually.