The problem actually runs even deeper.
By now I also observed the AI not claiming asteroids, which are accessible to it by turn 2 due to influence growth and the asteroids being directly adjacent to the homeworld.
I thought I could make a little mod for myself, where homeworlds start out with more influence, so there is not need to make AI constructors go for asteroid mines. So much for that idea...
I suspect that we are talking significantly different map settings being used here. I don't think it is an absolute strategy for all conditions, but could be one for the AI, as well as many people, to consider.
I run the default settings for galaxy creating. Large maps with suggested amount of players. For the test it was a tiny map with 1 opponent. I would hope the AI is somewhat optimized for those settings.
While the power of a few early asteroid mines cannot be denied, I don't consider it worth spending an Administrator on.
You can usually grab 4 or more mines (quite frequently while also claiming a ressource or two to boot) before turn 10. That's effectively a doubling of manuffacturing, research and wealth. You are less reliant on rush buying on your homeworld and can kickstart your colonies faster with that money. The research points enable you to squeeze in an administrator tech or two, when you need them.
I can't really imagine a scenario where dumping one or two admins on early asteroid mines does not pay off. It just gets you ahead all across.
And here I haven't talked about the fact, that those are my starting ships yet. So they effectively added 2 admins in the first place.
To my understanding, the telemetry being discussed is not about seeing AI behavior patterns, as you were doing, but about getting a usable summary of human player behavior to base future AI development on[...]
One of us is missing the point. To my understanding the telemetry is supposed to be used to see what are efficient human player strategies/ behavior patterns, which are to be used to improve the AI behavior patterns (maybe even train a neural network or other fun stuff).
My point is, that this is not even necessary for making significant AI improvements at this point. The AI is currently not set up in a way, that makes it 'understands the balance of the game' (e.g. not going for early asteroid mines).
It is not about what the AI may or may not be doing now. So I do not understand what overall point you are making about "results" in this context.
The result of gathering the telemetry and evaluating it or training the AI with it, will for example be:
- being a lot more aggressive with getting asteroid mines. I'm confident enough to bet, that this is gonna be one of the results, if the issue is left lying around for that long
-> so SD, will dedicate some ressources to teach the AI to grab more asteroid mines. At least I hope they will recognize it as an AI issue and not just nerf asteroid mines.
- another one will be evasion. The AI will need to consider it a lot more. Stacking evasion is currently an alternative to researching defenses of any kind. The AI really needs targetting scanners and probably also command ships
My point is, sure, they can gather telemetry and start working on these things after that, but why bother? Why go through this just to diagnose things, which can be seen by a trained eye. I'm not saying these obvious things will make the AI as good as it can get with the telemtry. I'm just saying, they can start on these issues long before the telemetry data is in.
And I am somewhat afraid they might miss the obvious issues alltogether.