I'm not an AI programmer and I have no real credential in game development to throw around, but I just want to point out some "facts":
1. The current AI we have is its first, barebone iteration.
2. Swen specifically said AI is going to be a big focus going forward during EA.
3. We have no fucking clue on just how capable the AI will be or how much resources & time Larian will dedicate to its development. Any "guesses" using complexity theories etc are conjectures at best, especially for an application in an extremely limited environment like strategic decisions in a turn-based video game.
So can we agree to at least wait for them to work on it a bit first before screaming "IT'S GOING TO BE SHIT"? Who knows. They said AI playing Go competitively is impossible. Well now they're all eating their words, aren't they? Not saying Larian is gonna build something that puts AlphaGo to shame, but can't we at least reserve our judgment until you know, when we actually have something to judge?
Wasn't arguing how good the AI will be
Just that I wouldn't place all the impetus on it for deciding how good the combat system it in a single player game.
The time complexity was in reference to how slow or fast it could take to find the best permutation of a combat system everyone likes. That has nothing to do with game mechanics and is more a in relation to game development.
People keep bringing up how we need to wait to see how AI develops to judge better a given system. While this is true, in part, it doesn't mean we should blindly accept that AI would solve all the problems or that there aren't methods to narrowing down a better system over a given user base faster as long the devs are willing to experiment with different ones
