Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
From: awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.games
Subject: Re: Strategic Conquest 3.0
Message-ID: <44020@ut-emx.uucp>
Date: 11 Feb 91 20:19:59 GMT
References: <1991Jan31.201929.29859@parc.xerox.com> <1991Feb3.035744.10548@portia.Stanford.EDU> <1991Feb4.004631.5296@Neon.Stanford.EDU> <6151@idunno.Princeton.EDU>
Sender: news@ut-emx.uucp
Reply-To: awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels)
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin
Lines: 12

In article <6151@idunno.Princeton.EDU> joes@phoenix.princeton.edu writes:

> It is true that the new computer opponent algorithim is better. However, it is
>not nearly good enough to "out think" an experienced human player, even at
>level 15. AS a general case, I feel that In complex games where a computer
>opponent has to play by the same rules as the human, the computer *is going to
>lose*. SSI games are a fine example of this.

It is my understanding that the computer gets a better starting position at the
higher levels, i.e. a starting island with considerably more cities and the
human player starts out with fewer cities.  Are you consistently winning at 
level 15?