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 ]