@zuPloed  You make great points.  The devs and Frogboy have emphasized they are out to cause players to have fun.  Your come from behind victory is a classic example of that kind of fun.  There is no real clever villian that you have had fun defeating, there is only a convincing simulation that worked for you.  That is what they are after for both casual players and us extreme types.  If Stardock could get away with not telling us anything about the AI worked, they could implement all sorts of clever short cuts.  They could quietly script and adjust things for maximum adventure.  If none of us were the wiser, then none of us would be less happy about it.  It's the knowing that bothers us.  And we have gotten too clever ourselves as players to fall for the old standard shortcuts like fow removal.  So, GalCiv2 took the long route and worked out a clever enough AI to simulate a bunch of fun villians and partners.  It took 7 years.

Stardock's approach to AI was always advertised a long term project.  Comments about Ferrarris and dedicated project teams seem to be completely unaware of that fact, either deliberately or not.  It makes me wonder if people research what they are buying enough.  Stardock has an overall 5 to 7 year commitment to continued development on GC3, with AI being one of the big reasons for the length of the project.  The AI in GC2 took that long to reach the benchmark status it gained.  Stardock has set itself ambitious goals.  We'll see.

I understand people want to contribute to that overall process and project.  It is irresistible fun.   For some of us, just as much as playing the game itself.  I don't understand sounding surprised or calling something "broken" or any of that.  Especially if it is offered as "encouragement".  I have been in team projects under high pressure for big audiences, and none of that stuff is ever perceived as encouraging.  

In the meantime, there is play value for a great many and griping value for a great many others.  Satisfaction for two different customer bases!!

Well, the problem is its rare the dev's get the handicap to apply evenly across the game. Usually it means they kick ass earlygame, and still suck lategame, because the handicap doesnt scale. 

If they build improvements on a planet in a smart way, then they will naturally keep up with or surpass the player - after all AI is excellent at micro

@erischild
Yeah, I can imagine, that from the devs side not all well meant suggestions are making them comfortable x). I have done a little work on a sc2 map for a while. I do know that ideas are cheap and implementations take time (and for professionals: money). I try to look for the places that are or should be easy to fix.

I am currently tinkering with horemvores tweaked AI a little and see if I can squeeze a little more out of it, especially in regards to the food situation. I don't want to promise too much yet, though.

I am still trying to balance that myself, I had issues with it when i first changed the Governors to act more like me, the AI ended up with whole planets full of farms, not sure what or why this happened at a guess I think they defaulted to Farm as fillers even though other improvements were listed.