It doesn't have to. This isn't rocket science, it's a game. Tracking ammo is basic math. I have X total ammo. Ha my ammo for my bg guns fallen below acceptable level? Yes? Then run.
If you want to talk about complex AI, starsector ship combat really isn't the place.
Again, you dont seem to grasp the apples and oranges you're arguing with here. Comparing numbers in columns is not the same thing as being able to shoot efficiently in a real time combat scenario. The issue isn't with an AI being able to determine whether its got any ammo left, it's being able to use that ammo efficiently enough that the ship doesn't become useless at some point during the combat. The amount of limited ammo that might prove to be any kind of limiting factor for a human player would be crippling to the AI.
Bollocks. Any ship can become useless in combat in one way or another.
What are missile frigates/destroyers equipped with limited ammo missiles then?
The whole point of retreating IS the AI realizing the ship is becoming useless, so pull out and replace with a fresh ship. Fleet combat - other ships are there too.
Wanting ammo limits enforced on yourself for a sense of challenge is understandable, but enforcing those same limits on AI ships creates more problems than it solves.
There are no problems.
You think a ship retreating is a problem. You think the AI not making maximum use of a weapon is a problem - like ammo makes a critical difference in that. News flash - the AI cannot you with infinite ammo if you're good either.
Just like CR, ammo forces fleets/ship to break off. I don't see a problem.
Which game are we talking about again? None of those things apply to SS, and in the case of a single player shooter it's because any human is going to rapidly learn the firing patterns of an ai enemy and run out the clock on their limited ammo. Enemies are given unlimited ammo because they wouldn't pose much of a challenge otherwise. Because the path to creating an ai foe that can really anticipate a players movement and provide an actual challenge on equal footing is probably impossible on current consumer gaming hardware, but definitely far longer and difficult than solving the problem another way. And since development costs time and money, they exercise their human ability to make smart use of finite resources.
You bring up FPS games and then complain that FPS games don't apply to SS?
I repeat - there are games with ammo, and the AI can handle that. The older SS had amo and the AI handled it. The AI doesn't have to be the greatest genius. And SS doesn't have chest-high walls to hide behind, neither the luxury to run any time he wants. It depends on the ship you would be flying (if it's slow you're going to have an easy time running and venting) and don't forget the AI can back away as well.
You keep brining up the scenario of an enemy ship that is out of ammo being easily destroyed - he would be a sitting duck. Yes, but you assume the following:
1) it has only ballistic weapons and no backups
2) it doesn't retreat (for some reason, even tough I stated pretty clearly it should start pulling back long before it's ammo depletes)
3) it doesn't have any friends
4) it just stay there and you can kill it easily
5) you still have ammo
Because if you just run around without shooting and wait for the enemy to run out of ammo..that means you're not supporting your other ships. Also, you can only control one weapon group, which means that unless every weapon group on your ship is turned off, they are going to auto-fire at ship in range - and if the enemy is in range to shoot you, then they are also in range of your guns.
As I said in my original post, "good enough" in this instance, is simply not good enough. You're arguing for ships and weapons than no player would choose to give to the ai if there was an alternative. It doesnt matter if ballistic weapons were much more powerful in return. It would be a terrible decision to give them to the AI you're relying on.
And if the ammo limits arent going to be meaningful, what would be the point?
I disagree.
Look, you're pretty much arguing with the entire thread on this from what I can see. So this appears to be a waste of time. Anyone who so convinced that AI is limited because developers are simply too lazy, isn't likely to be persuaded by anyone here no matter how reasonable their argument.
So you're trying to frame this as me attacking the SS devs now? So classy.
There are many reasons why AI can be limited. Stop putting words in my mouth.