Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

WIMPS!
You payed for the game. What diff if its one poor programmer? You can demand anything you want. I want to control units in fights like my other games. I want to save games so I can load if things are crap. I want cheat codes. And I want to play with my friends if we buy one disc.
I want all of that and I want it NOW because it should already be in it like the other games that cost this much!

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Ok, I generally lurk around here but I just have to say something here. I find the topic of this thread to be completely false and the way the concerns are given to be completely offensive. Point blank. To say that...

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Pisses me off. Yes, I know you apologized for the tone, but it's the concept that you were pissed because something you wanted wasn't improved in the game as if they owe it to you to do that. You paid $50, so they should improve the AI (probably the HARDEST aspect of the programming) and do it NOW. I mean it's been 6 months, right? And you're pissed? They actually show up on the Boards and implement player suggestions that have nothing to do with bug fixes (like modding) and you're pissed off and feel like you've been robbed? You can get these changes without buying the "Dominions II Gold Pack" and you're upset because your changes weren't there? Like Illwinter/Shrapnel have "misled" you somehow? Please!

I think Illwinter is a better name than "two guys with computers and another guy poking his head in every so often" but as I understand it that's what it is. And these 2 guys do what major companies have been unable to AND respond to fans directly and you're angry. Not "wishing it would change", but "angry".

Now the very idea that someone has been gipped by buying this game is ludicrous, and to even hint at a suggestion that they "falsely advertised" the AI is beyond words.

Now I know something about programming (I've worked as a software engineer and, more than that, I did the Online grimorie http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) and I can say that AI programming is difficult. To insinuate that "well it's easy just weight and have them do such and such" is insulting, as if they're in Tahiti drinking magaritas with their ill-gotten Dominions funds when they should take the 10 minutes to improve the AI. I mean how many games are supposed to provide a significant challenge after playing them for a few months?

Sorry for the rant, but I just think this is by far The Best Game I've Played bar none. I also think the devs are extremely accessible and responsive, and to suggest they "cheated" someone is completely out of control to me.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I certainly don't mind, Master of Magic / Orion were funnest and toughest at the impossible settings even though the AI receieved significant bonuses at those levels http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .

Certainly if a player didn't want the CPU opponents to cheat they could just play at normal difficulty instead. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I agree with this.. let the AI cheat. Gem, income bonuses, randomly appearing forts, permenent +3 luck, +300 design points (for scales), whatever. Only on higher difficulty levels, of course.

Heh, a neat idea might be to have a moving bonus to AI scales, meaning that at normal difficulty all their scales go with the normal AI creation routines. At hard, they get all scales as normal, but with a +1 bonus or something? +3 at Impossible?

[ May 09, 2004, 06:54: Message edited by: Slygar ]

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The AI already DOES get bonus design points at higher difficulties. There's no income or gem bonus, however, above what it gains from having superior scales due to bonus points and better searching due to more magic from said points.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You got what you paid for. You had every opportunity to check the demo out before you coughed up the money. The things you complain about are design decisions, you might as well demand that your chessmaster game should have a spurts of blood and cute battle sounds, or that you should be able to tactically control a battle that played out whenever two chess pieces enter the same square. There is no law that point by point details what features a game should have. Had dom 2 been marketed as having these things you demand you would have a case, but it doesn't. You can make any demands you like, but unless they are reasonable noone is going to pay attention to them.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

JO, I hope he was being sarcastic. Because otherwise he needs to be taken out back and given a sound beating.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You might be right. If you check his profile he claims one of his interests is trolling, and his occupation is irritant. I guess I swallowed his hook and bait. Don't click on his hompeage whatever you do though.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Ah, yes, his homepage. I've heard about that one before. I take it you clicked on it? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Yup

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Yes, yes I understand what you say of course.
I never demanded anything imho, I only posted my opinion.
Now a question for the developers: Dont you think that hella LOT of players would be thankful for the AI improvements?? I am totally sure that hella LOT of players are waiting for AI improvements, they just _dont_say_it_ here, and why? Propably because they know the anser from the devs:

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Is this really pointless??? I am totally sure that this is far from pointles!!

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The devs know that the AI is weak. I am pleased to see that they know this at least.

I guess my first post told you about the AI weaknesses:

1. The AI is massing weak troops. Why? I see hella lot of light infantry and cheap troops. Pointless, they are toast.
2. The AI is making weird strategic decisions. It is moving around with strong commanders without a point, and without a decent army.
3. The AI is not equipping its heroes properly, sometimes not at all.
4. The AI is not protecting its heroes/commanders.
5. The AI isnt using the mid/late game spells very well.
6. The AI wont summon too many "heavyweight monsters". -> I wonder what the heck the AI is doing with its magic income.
7. The AI's battlefield tactics is kinda laughable as well.


I wasnt constructive? I dont think so.

Maybe my tone wasnt right, I am moderating myself now. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Still I am totally sure that everyone know that the AI weakness is a big problem, even if they dont say. And yes the Doms 2. AI is lot weaker than most of the 50$ strategy games.
I know that 2 men cannot make everything, but 6 months wasnt enough to improve the AI? After all those huge old threads about the AI??
This is what I cant understand.

I have seen an old poll about the sp-mp community here, and the poll ended up that we have more singleplayers! I think, that spending time to improve the AI is not a waste, in fact it should have priority on the 'to do list.' http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif .. especially now, because after 4 patches we still wont have AI improvements. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Kris and the devs -> I never wanted to offend you, I wanted to be creative, I posted the bad parts of the AI, what should be improved, so I dont think that this was pointless.

P.

[ May 09, 2004, 11:07: Message edited by: proteus ]

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

If they took out the light infantry, you'd post the same thing again on a different thread, but without the first problem.

I've been playing computer games for about 15 years, which is pretty much as long as computer games have been around, and I've always been a strategy fan. Dom 2 doesn't have the best AI of all the games I've played. There, I said it, and you said it and he said it and it's been said before.

The fact that they HAVE an AI is pretty impressive. And now you don't want it to cheat? For god's sake, get a grip. Illwinter is possibly the most responsive dev group I've ever seen, and I bet they're not exactly rolling in the dough. I was happy to have my 50 bucks go to some guys who work hard on their game, and not have most of it go to marketing, dynamic lighting effects and impressive packaging.

This game is more bang for the same buck and the money goes to the people who actually did most of the work. For 50 bucks (actually for me it more like 80, because I'm Canadian) I got more than my money's worth, I'm I mostly play SP.

I'm sure they will improve the AI, if they can, and now that people are pitching in to help it should go faster. 6 months is no great shake of time on a game this replayable, and I for one feel that all the effort we're putting into rebutting you would be better spent modding, playing or coding to improve an already great game.

You've got a right to complain, but put your time where your mouth is, and do something to improve it, don't slag others who are.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

I cannot do anything to improve the AI, just like you cannot do antyhing, this is the coders job.
I had a talk with my brother, he will make a mod and remove all LI, to see that what will the AI do than.

Maybe it will be lot better for SP games until the AI will be fixed, this is the onlyu thing what we can do. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Im going to answer this one in 2 stages. I will get to your 7 points next.

I wasnt constructive? I dont think so.

No not really. Saying somehing is broke is criticism. Suggesting a way to improve it, in a way that might get the other person to look at it, thats constructive.

Maybe my tone wasnt right, I am moderating myself now.
Thank you

Still I am totally sure that everyone know that the AI weakness is a big problem, even if they dont say.

Everyone knows its weak when pitted against a player who knows the game. Not everyone feels its a problem. Or at least not everyone puts it as high on the list of things to improve.

I know that 2 men cannot make everything, but 6 months wasnt enough to improve the AI? After all those huge old threads about the AI??
This is what I cant understand.

Did you read the long list of things that went into each patch?
http://www.illwinter.com/dom2/history.html
Did you see the long threads about those things? (did you notice the difference in the tone of those threads which did get put into the patches?) The battle replay speed was one which had many favorite Dom1 players refusing to join us. That was a feature which involved both the MP and SP Groups. The answer involved alot of different suggestions on how to "fix" it and the final one was abit of a compromise. Not as fancy as some wanted but it was one that could be fit into a patch and has made ALOT of people very happy.

I have seen an old poll about the sp-mp community here, and the poll ended up that we have more singleplayers!

On a game that was built around "fun multiplayer game" you thought that pole said to "do more soloplayer stuff"? Dont you think it could also have meant "more multiplayer improvements"?

I think, that spending time to improve the AI is not a waste, in fact it should have priority on the 'to do list.' .. especially now, because after 4 patches we still wont have AI improvements.

4 patches? And I really wish you would stop saying that. Just because the AI doesnt kick your tail its not the same as "still no improvements". I see AI improvements listed in both patches, and many things that were improvments to both AI and Players though often more for the AI (such as friendly fire)

Kris and the devs -> I never wanted to offend you, I wanted to be creative, I posted the bad parts of the AI, what should be improved, so I dont think that this was pointless.

Posting your feelings are fine but if someone says that posting the "bad" parts of the AI and what should be improved was pointless, maybe they mean because you posted the same list as before? The only point you seem to have brought up by posting it again was to be mad that you had to post it again. You make it sound like it was ignored. As if the devs werent aware of it. You wanted to know why they hadnt fixed your wishlist yet.

Joining in on the threads which had actually made progress on the subject might have been better.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">This has been done often in other threads, and better than I can do it, but lets go over these again....

1. The AI is massing weak troops. Why? I see hella lot of light infantry and cheap troops. Pointless, they are toast.

There is only 1 AI and it plays the same in small or large games, low indepts or high, low magic or high, and any nation. LI are not pointless. They are only pointless to certain nations in certain games. If you think their purpose is to beat up your hvy troops then play some more.

If you REALLY feel this can be improved then show us a forumula. What type of troop, when, how many, what percentage of the formula? Write us the AIs code so we all can test it to see if it holds up in more different game situations than the one now.

If you check out the threads I mentioned then you would see that there is alot that players can do on this even if they are not coders. Do a search for...
SUGGESTION: AI castle building algorithm
SUGGESTION: AI troop building algorithm

2. The AI is making weird strategic decisions. It is moving around with strong commanders without a point, and without a decent army.

Like much of this, this is an opinion stated as a fact. If you are going to work with quantity over quality then random movement is best. It holds up against human players much better than smart movements.

3. The AI is not equipping its heroes properly, sometimes not at all.

Another area where a small effort on your part to come up with a formula would have kept you from making statements like how easy these would be to fix. Get specific and lets test it.

4. The AI is not protecting its heroes/commanders.

Probably true. I think it does a better job when they are at home, and probably when they are first sent out. But eventually the flak troops die off and you are left with just the big ones. Especially bad if thats the AIs god.

Im not sure how well the path-finding works for something like a "go home" plan. Especially since the AI does not store information well for multi-turn actions so each turn it would have to re-decide that the piece needs to go home.

Maybe a "stop and build army if less than 100" command or something so it can boost up with whatever indepts are at that province but that would end up with "crappy stupid armies" again.

5. The AI isnt using the mid/late game spells very well.
Same problem as equipment. Come up with a formula. One of the reasons that AI's in other games can do better is that the choices are less and more obvious. The AI does cast spells, it does select what it casts, youjust think it could be improved. But would your improvement work for all nations in all games without alot of "if this and if that"? (and how well would you take it when somoene says your way is stupid and broken?)

6. The AI wont summon too many "heavyweight monsters". -> I wonder what the heck the AI is doing with its magic income.

Since its a turn-based PBEM game its hard to write in multiple turn planning. Saving up for things is difficult to write. Thats true of things like castles, temples, major spells, major summonings, major equipment. If an AI has 50 gems and needs to decide what to do with them then it will decide to make 5 castings of a 10 gem summoning instead of save up for a 75 gem summoning. To decide any different would have it saving up gems early in the game when it should have been doing small summonings.

7. The AI's battlefield tactics is kinda laughable as well.
Actually Ive seen alot of improvement in this. It now uses more formations and positioning on the battlefield. Unless I use scouts to watch their battles as they approach me I can have my strategys ruined by the formations they use. Of course such surprises are easy to beat if you know they are coming but thats alittle hard to fix in an AI.

[ May 09, 2004, 14:59: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Thanks for your detailed reply Mr. Parker.
I think that you are right in many things, we should come up with detailed ideas. Propably the devs know about these AI probelms as well...
Castle & Troop building algorythm is what we propably need first of all.
My idea is, that the devs should code the AI to build LOT Less LI units, concentrate on summons and HI & HC.
Maybe this is a problem because of the few AI fortresses. No fortress -> no advanced units.
IMHO first of all the AI castle building should be fixed. Than it may build HI & HC over LI.
If not, than the devs should implent troop build algorythms.
I will post more ideas soon.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Yeap, Im gonna make a mod like that. I think it will be interesting to see, that what will happen with the AI, if all LI will be taken out. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif


Oh guys a question! Can we remove/disable spells????

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Personally I think the random fort appearance is a great idea for a higher difficulty level. The biggest problem with the AI is the lack of forts which causes it to use almost nothing but indy troops. Designing a few SC kits for summons like bane lords it could then try to build could also shake things up a bit. It won't take that much to improve it a lot in practice.

By the way, the HOMM3 AI does cheat. It gets bonus resources at the start at higher levels and also a small income in all resources every turn even without mines. Cheating is fine in my opinion. Whatever it takes to make the game interesting.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Your first post wasn't pointless, but it has appeared several times before. The arguments that often follow are pointless, both in this thread and others.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Your first post wasn't pointless, but it has appeared several times before. The arguments that often follow are pointless, both in this thread and others. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes arguments might be 'pointless' in one way, I agree. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Ignore the past arguments, and focus on my first post, everything is there, what is wrong with the AI. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
..btw I apologize again for the arguments, those were posted because I felt that you cannot be bothered about these important things. Maybe I was wrong.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes, in homm3 the AI getting + resources on high levels, but the core AI is rocking on normal level as well.

Yes I forgot to add that the AI is not building enough forts at all, I will correct my first post.


You know, my brother just mentioned something yesterday, that all LI should be removed from the game, and than the AI would be forced to make strong armies, maybe it would even build forts!!!
We must make a mod like that, I really wonder what would happen!!

[ May 09, 2004, 12:51: Message edited by: proteus ]

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes, I proposed the same kind of mod some time ago, but in a more complicated manner (change cost.res of units to "help" AI to not buid crap). But a straight take-out-the-LI approach is certainly simpler. You will still have AI builds a lot of indy militias http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif , but at least national troops should be better... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Gandalf,
Your defense of LI is good, but really LI is useless to AI, as it plays it as if it were HI ...
A human player can do *some* things with LI because he'll use it purposefully (patrol, front line fodder, mass enchantments, sneakiness...), that's not the case with the AI, so it should rather not build any http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif !
(edit) : Why are you asking ppl to give "formulas" for AI ? Users complain about a feature they think "bad", they don't *have to* give a solution...
(Should be your techie-oriented thinking http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

[ May 10, 2004, 08:45: Message edited by: PDF ]

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

I dont think its the techie in me so much as its the diplomat in me. I could give specific examples if I knew what areas you felt you were expert at.

If someone reads you a paper that they think is good enough to get published but you dont think so, then there are alot of response you can give.

You can say it sucks, and walk off.

You can say it that in your opinion it needs something more, and walk off.

You can say it could use some improvement and at the same time give specifics.

You could give specifics and make some possible suggestions of wording changes.

Of course the easy thing is to say it sucks and walk off. If it doesnt change you can say "I told you" over and over and over. Choosing a different way of approaching it is probably as simple as how good a friend they are and whether or not you really want them to look at what you are saying. This is even more true if what you are pointing at are some lame jokes that the writer doesnt feel is a major point to the paper at all.

I do not consider myself a programmer. But I have worked with programmers and I know that you can often meet them half-way (usually called psuedo-code) then they will see the answer and convert it to real coding. It doesnt take a programmer to talk in language which trys to cover many possibilities using "if this" "if that" "but not this" although having been a parent can help http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Gandalf,
I agree that complains are more productive if possible solutions are given...
But as long as the complaint itself is argumented ("it sucks" being *not* documented, "AI builds lot of crap LI" is better http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif ) I find it mildly offensive to request people to find solutions ("Ah you think AI is crap ! So now tell me how can you do better yourself" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/blush.gif ?)
The problem is not that players should fix the AI, and that's the "build AI" is feeble is no debate... Now it's to IW to state if they will either try to improve it, or else externalize the parameters to allow players to mod it (techiespeech back http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">PDF I didnt think it would be you that drove me outside of my diplomatic stance. Please dont take this personally, I figured it would be aimed at someone else. Read this quick because I will probably regret posting it as soon as I hit enter.

I havent told anyone to do anything. Ive been suggesting it whenever someone seems to be suggesting that a loud complaint will do the same job.

The devs HAVE answered in every *&^%$# thread on this subject. Do they have to answer EVERY post IN the thread for people to feel they are getting heard? READ THE THREADS and you should end up with the same impression I did.

Let me make some CHOICE pointers here....
Kristoffer in "SUGGESTION: AI troop building algorithm "
Hmm, it's a bit difficult to follow without graphical representation. I should test it when I get some spare time.

A nice answer, an answer of hope, given in the thread I keep trying to point to. The one that gives testable cases and possible solutions.

Later...
Kristoffer in "Good game, but....the AI is very bad"
Hopefully there will be improvements in the AI, but as before I can't give you any guarantees.

Im abit surprised he even stepped into that one considering the title itself says its going to go in the wrong direction. But he did answer and quite early in the thread.

Im sorry I was busy and didnt notice the thread in time to maybe keep it from going to....

Kristoffer later in "Good game, but....the AI is very bad"
Perhaps all the pointless complaining made us pissed.

There was some constructive AI discussions recently that made me interested, but I'm quickly loosing interest. Right now I'm more interested in doing something I am feeling positive about like improving Pangaean themes or finishing the Shepherds of Creation scenario, or for that matter work at school.

The reason I do not say that there will not be an AI improvement is because we also feel that the AI should be improved.

Now, let me ask. Is anyone still confused about the best choice of direction for those who REALLY WOULD LIKE to see the AI get some improvements? Is anyone still confused about the best choice of direction to go if you want to gaurantee that the devs move the AI DOWN on the wishlist? Now Im sure that we will hear some discussion on whether some people feel it SHOULD be that way or not but I cosnider that to be another dead end discussion. Im a solo player interested in a better AI and Ive made my choice.

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/26/26_9_19.gif

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Gandalf, I am 14 years old, I dont think that I could help in any coding/design tricks.

I always thought that this part is really up to the devs. We -the players- are posting our opinion about various subjects, maybe making suggestions.
I didnt knew about those old topics what we had, so maybe it was really pointless to make this post, since that old thread is from november, and the developers never cared about that thread at all, as I see. It was a huge thread with LOT of good ideas, I just saw it.

Gandalf even you posted a lot in that thread, I just saw it, so you must know, that lot of good ideas can be found there, and still, the 'fix the ai' thing was on the bottom on the 'to do' list, that is for sure.
Hopefully it isnt there still..

I am really trying to be constructive, but this AI coding thing is a bit too complicated to me I think, that is why I only mentioned the LI and castle building problems in that case.

P.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Think whatever you want. It wont change the way things are. I think people should offer solutions instead of problems but thats a common saying in the workplace.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Which thread is this that they "never cared about"? I thought they answered in most of the threads?

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Of course it is. Well not the bottom but lower than many other things. Why wouldnt it be? No one has come up with anything to change that yet.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Bull. You cant play a game of Dominions pretending to be the AI? Try playing with no LI at all? You can beat the AI so often that this is a problem but you cant play like a dumb AI to test a theory?

Do you have any idea what army the AI should have? How do they get that? Do they build all HI until they cant afford more and then build LI? Or should it be LI, LI, HI, Cavalry, repeat until broke. Now how well does that work if you arent playing Ulm? Does it work for Man? Pangaea? Ctis? Caelum? Atlantis?
Should they build only at home? In every province? How well does that work if you are on a map larger than the small maps? 100 provinces? 200? 300? 500?

[ May 10, 2004, 18:07: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

I have some ideas.

The AI shouldn't build LI at all. The AI cannot make good moves with the LI. It shouldn't build LC after turn 10. This should be a core rule for all nations.
I posted my idea about the AI castle building, in a previous thread.

As I said before, the castle building problem must be fixed first of all. Maybe with more forts the AI wont build as many LI units. If it will, than code it, to dont build LI at all, because LI controlled by the AI is everything just not a good army.

Well I started to make my mod, so we will see what will happen without LI.
One problem could be here, the provincial militias. Those are weak LI units, and I bet that the AI will build them.
Perhaps I will change all provinical militias as well. They will be strong HI units.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Well with your mod you will be able to test that. There is a --superhost command which will let you loop the game on automatic. You can add --scoredump so that each turn will spit out the scoreboard. That way you can keep an eye on things and decide when to kill the loop to jump in and see how things are.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Ah thanks Gandalf, good infos! It will be a few days until Im ready with the mod. If it will work, I will make it downloadable.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Actually the AI is okay considering the size of the gaming company. Developing an intelligent AI is probably one of the most challenging tasks gaming companies have. Most gaming companies develop a single artificial intelligence which follows a series of x,y,z steps. Once gamers identify the set pattern it's easy to conquer the computer opponents.

I believe the best choice would be to begin developing improved AI for Dominions_III since the biggest and best changes most likely cannot be done for Dominions_II.

BEST IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE IMPROVING THE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE:

1) Randomly selected AI personalities at the start of each game. Thus only one or two personalities out of 10 would use the tactic of massing lots of low level units.

2) With the assistance of scripting gamers are able to create or improve existing AI personalities. This was done long ago with Warcraft_II and Age_of_Empires_II.... and even recently done with Neverwinter Nights. I see no reason why it could not be introduced for Dominions_III.

This would allow for a strong replay value for AI opponents.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

I'd say the AI is remarkably good. Especially considering both the complexity of the game, and the level of AI in other strategy games, even ones with much less complexity.

My own win/loss record against the AI is something like 3 complete losses (I was wiped out after making some initial progress), 2 convincing wins (not yet completed), and 5 games with very long stalemates and very near defeats before eventually I'm starting to pull ahead (but also not completed).

I'd say that's a pretty awesome record for the AI, considering I'm a very smart strategy game player with decades of gaming experience, and that the game has insane amounts of complexity.

Of course, I'm not just duelling against a single AI in these games - I tend to play against multiple AI's with some or all of them given bonuses, and I don't go nuts trying to exploit techniques to the utmost, but rather I play to enjoy the game by trying out different strategies and techniques to see how they work, and so on. I don't recall every having a more rewarding experience against an AI player in a strategy game.

The "Light Infantry issue" isn't so much an AI issue as it is a game balance issue. The LI fight like HI and so become rather ineffective in most cases, and therefore they are generally a weak choice. I would say that should be addressed by making LI a more viable choice, by adjusting the tactical AI so LI don't often get caught in melee with superior enemy forces, and/or by reducing their gold cost in most cases.

PvK

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Hum, maybe "lot of" problem will be solved, with the removal of LI. We shall see. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif
Damn I cant wait to see, what will the AI do than! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

[ May 10, 2004, 23:14: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Hehe yup, I agree with this sorta. Anyways Gandalf propably meant that we should help the devs with that. However they know that whats wrong with the AI, I guess they can solve those problems with coding/testing.
I will try to help them, to give them examples if I can, but I dont know that it will help at all or not. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Hummm, are you a veteren player?? I am not, and I can beat the AI all the time easily, and I am not using any SCs etc. at all.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Gandalf,
I'm sorry you took my post as offensive, maybe I didn't word it correctly and went up preaching stupidly (English isn't my native language).

I didn't make any remark concerning the devs response, I know they hear us and try to satisfy their customers/fans.
And I've no grudge against the local mods either, that make a terrific work.

Apologies for this stupid episode http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif .

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Its possible. Why dont you post the game parameters. What map? what AIs? what settings on resources and indept strength? What nation do you play?

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

I hope my wife never reads this board. She might learn a new tactic to get attention.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Gandalf, I am always playing with indep str 5, because I heard that its the best for the AI.

Hmm I am playing against 1-8 AIs, different maps.
All settings on normal, except the AI. Some AIs are on normal, some on the highest diff level.
I do this because that way 1-2 AIs will be very strong in the early game, so more challange!

I think I will play against allied AIs, I never tried that. I think that will be hard enough!

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Hm, this will be a bit harder than I thought. I need some advice. What should I do with the provincial militias? Make them 'unavaible' in a way, example all of them will cost 100 resources, so the AI propably won't recruit them, OR make them all heavy troops?
I like the first one better, that way the AI will only use the national troops, and maybe it will build lot more forts, since the provinical militias will cost more than any other unit.
It sounds weird I know, but maybe the SP AI will be lot more challenging. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ May 11, 2004, 18:26: Message edited by: MStavros ]

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Other things that boost AI's are:
lower indepts (5 is about human normal)
higher resources
higher magic (if you are not big on spell use)
low random events

If you are going to try allied AI's to make the game harder then take a look at some of the maps Ive done at www.dom2minions.com such as "Poke in the Eye" "Mazes and Monsters" or "War for Independents". Also, I could probably use some suggestions from you on how to make "WE vs THEM" harder since thats supposed to be a game which FORCES players to ally against the AI (if I can make it that hard)

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">LOL! Yep!

PvK

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">To at least test the concept quickly the first one would be easier. Leif or I could also write you a routine which populates a map on purpose with certain pop-types and leaving others out. Maybe making all the provinces have knights and longbows http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

[quote]Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:

Quote:

To at least test the concept quickly the first one would be easier. Leif or I could also write you a routine which populates a map on purpose with certain pop-types and leaving others out. Maybe making all the provinces have knights and longbows http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Actually, look at the DovregubbensHall.ran included with the DomScripts.zip for an example of a randomisation configuration that does just that (although mooseriders are much more fun than longbows).

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Its possible. Why dont you post the game parameters. What map? what AIs? what settings on resources and indept strength? What nation do you play? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well proteus, I've been playing Dominions since several months before Dominions II came out, and I got Dominions II immediately after it was released.

As Gandalf suggests, and as I mentioned, the game setup, and the method of play, make a big difference. I tend to include plenty of AI's, and usually end up fighting one or more AI's within the first 20 turns, because they start out only a few provinces away. Or, in another game, I managed to spread out fairly well when I ended up having to fight three AI's at once (who were also fighting each other) and got down to about two or three provinces left before I made a comeback.

Anyway, difficulty depends a lot on the situation.

P.S. That is, it's essentially impossible to program an AI for a game like this that will be as challenging as a smart and experienced human player. However it is very possible to set up the situation (more AI's, AI difficulty level, do nothing for a few turns at game start, etc.), and/or to limit yourself from taking advantage of the AI by not over-using techniques that the AI doesn't, or not using techniques that exploit known AI limitations, or simply to think and play like a roleplayer rather than like a minimaxing munchkin). I haven't found it necessary to do more than include enough AI's to get some extremely satisfying, interesting, and challenging games, though.

PvK

[ May 11, 2004, 19:42: Message edited by: PvK ]

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Thanks Gandalf! I downloaded those + the other new user made maps as well now! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I still havent really gotten into MODs. Im having too much fun with MAPs. But I was thinking about it this morning.

Do you program in anything? It should be real easy to generate a text file which addresses each of the (1100?) units. Then with the help of a list of the units such as Ive seen elsewhere around here, you could just have the mod commands you want to use copied into the clipboard. Scroll thru the list and hit Ctrl-V to paste those at each number you want to mod.

If you cant generate a starter .dm of all the units then I can whip one off for you. Or you could download one of Leifs list such as the randomized one, and strip it.

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Yeah, I really need a 'perfect' unit list, I was wondering already, that where to find one.

Also is there any lists for weapon 'IDs'?

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Not sure about a complete unit number list, but there is a weapon/armor list on the stickied mod thread on this forum.

PvK

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Stavros / Proteus, copy/paste the below text into notepad and save it as any filename xxxxxxx.dm Then put it into your dominions\mods directory and test it out if you wish. Don't forget to enable the mod in dominions under "preferences" / "mod settings".

It makes all Militia / Light Infantry cost 999 resources so the AI hasn't built any in my quick 25 turn test game. Met armies of Ulm which recruited pikemen + infantry of ulms + archers + sappers + siege engineers and had 4 Tribal cavalries recruited. Mictlan who had 2 100% national armies of about 30-50 units a piece. And only saw 1 vanheim army consisting of 20 hirdmen and 5 Van's.

Haven't even run into any independent High Infantry unit yet although I doubt the AI has enough resources in the independent provinces to make them at this point. But you can report the results of what the AI builds instead once the LI are no longer feasible. I think archers may end up being more frequent... but thats just a guess.

Complete unit list can be found in this thread :
http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin...;f=74;t=002613

*** start of file, copy/paste everything below, don't include this line and save as filename.dm from notepad

#modname "high cost LI"
#description "makes all Militia & Light Infantry cost 999 resources"
#Version 1.0


#selectmonster 18
#rcost 999
#end

#selectmonster 28
#rcost 999
#end

#selectmonster 29
#rcost 999
#end

#selectmonster 30
#rcost 999
#end

#selectmonster 31
#rcost 999
#end

[ May 13, 2004, 18:57: Message edited by: delacroix ]

Re: Good game, but....the AI is very bad.
 

Okay thanks for your help! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif