.com.unity Forums

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)
-   Space Empires: IV & V (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   GOLD A.I. vs old A.I. (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=4751)

Emperor Zodd December 8th, 2001 01:05 AM

GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
How much better will the new A.I. in the GOLD EDITION be compared to the old A.I. from se4?

Also, will the problems with sats and fighters finally be fixed in the gold edition?

Aub December 8th, 2001 02:29 AM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
Yes, sats and fighters. Can we have them in Groups when they are launched form a planet or a carrier?

There is a way to group your fighters the way you want (using fleets), but it's extremely cumbersome. As for sats, there is no way. AS a result, sats over planets are pretty useless - they just may appear on the wrong side...

Is it a difficult code change? Now that with the Gold edition you've sold your soul -- we are paying, and want to get a new game's worth of features in return... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ 08 December 2001: Message edited by: Aub ]</p>

Baron Munchausen December 8th, 2001 06:57 AM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Emperor Zodd:
How much better will the new A.I. in the GOLD EDITION be compared to the old A.I. from se4?

Also, will the problems with sats and fighters finally be fixed in the gold edition?
<hr></blockquote>

As with everything else, it's an incremental improvement, not some 'revolutionary' new thing. Yes, the AI is a bit smarter about some things, and some mistakes have been corrected. But it will still completely forget that it ever had a claim to a system once you wipe out its colonies. And it will still send fleets yoyoing back & forth across it's empire as it's priorities change from one turn to another, resulting in no attacks against any of the several threats it cannot decide amongst.

Q December 8th, 2001 08:28 AM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
What is the problem with fighters?

Emperor Zodd December 8th, 2001 09:20 AM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
Sats should deploy equally around a planet and if we can fly fighters around a sector like a ship can, than so should the A.I.

Mephisto December 8th, 2001 12:03 PM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
Satellites have increased range added with their mounts, and weapon platforms, too. Beware of a large weapon platform that can hit you 14 square away.
MM has fixed the kaimkaze, troop and boarding ships not searching for fleets. As we modders now can finally use these ships in attack fleets as special ships, be prepared to meet some new challenges like AI supply ships, AI point defense ships, AI planetary napalm bombers, anything our mad minds can think of. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Resident Alien 2 December 9th, 2001 03:16 PM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:


.... But it will still completely forget that it ever had a claim to a system once you wipe out its colonies. And it will still send fleets yoyoing back & forth across it's empire as it's priorities change from one turn to another, resulting in no attacks against any of the several threats it cannot decide amongst.
<hr></blockquote>

I have recently being playing some Europa Universalis. That game has the concept of the "core province" marker (a shield that appears on the political map). They mark the historic full extent of a country, not it's actualy current borders. They can also be added to and subtracted from by triggered or random events in the game.

For example take Russia in 1792. There are a lot of core province markers owned by other countries: Poland in the west, various Khanates in the east and south.

The Russian AI is always working towards acquiring all provinces marked as its "core". Therefore the AI maintains it's focus across decades of game time and multiple wars of expansion.

In SE4 terms any system where an AI has or had a colony would be marked with a "Core System" flag. There after if the AI lost a system it would remember and try to reclaim it.

In fact the claim system marker could be used for this purpose and the more agressive AI's could push their core system claims to the max.

[ 09 December 2001: Message edited by: Resident Alien 2 ]</p>

Beck December 9th, 2001 05:06 PM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
There is already a form of this at work in the game as the AI will claim all systems adjacent to one in which it has colonies. The problem the Baron was alluding to is the lack of memory from turn to turn. EU being a RTS has more continuity since it doesn't have an "end of turn". Using your example, SE4's problem is akin to in EU of Russia sending an army against Poland and then at some point forgetting it was at war with it and then sending it against the Khanates. Whatever decisions are made on turn x are not carried through to turns y+. So frequently the AI will decide to launch a massive invasion to reclaim a system to only have the fleet arrive and "forget" why it was sent, leaving without doing anything. Any particular course of action that cannot be completed in a single turn are subject to being over-ruled in later turns, even when no compelling reason can be shown for the change.

jowe01 December 10th, 2001 12:20 PM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
Shouldn't the Gold edition fix these shortcomings ? They are serious drawbacks,not minor details. I realize that this would mean investing some more time into the code, but hey, we are paying a good part of the price for a completely new game for the Gold edition. I realize that in order to support Aaron's/Shrapnel's good work, some people would buy SE4 Gold even if it only consisted of SE4 1.0 with a new sticker on the "manual". However, I think that in order to be a success, there has to be some real value-added. After an initial wave of "freak-purchases", you can only sell more if people feel that they receive something in return for their money. IMHO, you cannot hide from the customer base as a whole that so far the "Gold Edition" offers one of the least "bang for your buck" of all add-ons which I have ever seen from any gaming company (basically only the TCP/IP support is worth mentioning).

Now hammer me, but I would actually recommend to anyone to withhold your pre-orders until it becomes clear that the AI really gets beefed up in SE4 Gold. Not that Aaron/Shrapnell would not merit making some more money for the good support which they have offered so far. On the game which I have bought in November 2000 they have offered very good value for money. However, what I have seen in terms of new features in SE4 Gold simply is not worth another 35 $ plus expedition fees.

Please, please, Malfaldor, do yourself a favor and start seriously tackling all the bad AI shortcomings. If not, just offer a 10 $ download, that would be fair.

[ 10 December 2001: Message edited by: jowe01 ]</p>

DirectorTsaarx December 10th, 2001 06:46 PM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
Just to add my opinion about "Gold" editions:

I was reading one of my computer gaming mags over the weekend, and there were a couple articles dedicated to "Gold" editions of a variety of games. Some Gold editions were nothing more than a collection of user mods, some were just a collections of different Versions of the game (like Quake and Quake II), some were patch collections, some included new levels/missions and some actually added new features. Oh, and the prices ranged from $15 to $50. So, as near as I can tell, SEIV:G is a typical Gold edition of a computer game. It includes a collection of user mods(in a convenient package, plus a mod picker), some new features (both TCP/IP and drones), new systems (SEIV Version of levels, kind of) and some bugfixes/patches. The only thing missing is a copy of SE2 and/or SE3 (like we'd need either of those). All for $35, just slightly more than the average price for other "Gold" edition games. My only complaint is that the SEIV:G "meets expectations" for a Gold edition of a game, rather than "exceeding expectations" as MM & Shrapnel usually do.

Menschenfresser December 10th, 2001 07:02 PM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
I fall somewhere between the Last two Posts. I am all for supporting quality game makers like Malfador and Shrapnel. Especially during a time in gaming when it seems as if the industry is producing the same crap over and over.

I absolutely love SE4...hands down. However, I do feel I am going to wait to see what Gold holds. I will probably buy it anyway, if only for the continued updates.

I would love to see the game expand and forever expand. That is the nature of the game and of those who play it.

I am usually a patient gamer, meaning when I hear a game is coming out and it entices me, I usually wait...sometimes a year or two, before picking it up. A)It is cheaper by then, and B) it has already gone through several patches. Sometimes I even wait for the Gold edition.

I am not so interested in Malfador tweaking the AI to perfection....I am sorry, but they (malfador) just don't have the time. The modders are the key; therefore, I support the faction, if there is one, that wants as many extra mod files added to the game as possible. Events, Ai files, abilities, abilities abilities.....add as much as possible even if Malfador doesn't have the time or will to exploit them in new features. We can make them.

The focus should be on what the modders want, because afterall, we all end up playing with either our own mods or someone else's in the end.

In the end, that is what will make me appreciate the Gold Version.

Q December 10th, 2001 07:24 PM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
I agree with Menschenfresser that the priority for MM should be in things that improve the possibilities of making modifications.
The intoduction of the drones is a good example, that we never could have achieved through modding, but gives us great new possibilities (as far as I can tell).
On the other hands the introduction of weapon mounts for satellites and weapon platforms is something modders have already developped a long time ago. If MM includes that in the gold Version, fine; if they reinvented it by themselves it's a waste of their precious time.

jowe01 December 10th, 2001 09:07 PM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
Q is actually putting the finger on the issue. Most of the AI shortcomings which were mentioned in the first Posts of this threat and in some others cannot be fixed by "simply" modifying the data files. They require that the code is changed. Obviously, this requires a most probably non-negligible input in terms of time from Malfaldor. From my point of view, the Gold edition would be the point in time to make that investment ... and be paid for it. Only changes to the hardcoded AI can bring about revolutionary improvements in single player mode. The modders, while doing great jobs, can only optimize the parameters which the hardcoded AI employs - and currently this often means optimizing the behaviour of an artificial idiot.

[ 10 December 2001: Message edited by: jowe01 ]</p>

geoschmo December 11th, 2001 02:28 AM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
Well Jowe01, I couldn't disagree with you more, but I see no reason to "hammer" you about it. It's a differance of opinion after all.

I believe that simply in terms of the hours of play received from the original game, I have received so much more for the original $35 dollars than I had any right to expect.

The ai may not be perfect, but to be honest I don't play the ai all that much. I don't think that with a game with as many variables as this one has, you will ever get an AI that can take a competant player in a straight up fight. But I play against other humans, and even an inexperienced human player can offer a far greater challange than an AI.

I have eagerly preordered my copy of the Gold CD and would highly encourage everyone else to do the same. If for nothing else it is worth it for the onging support or this great game. But that's not all you get of course. He has added many features that we have all been asking for.

If you don't feel it's deserved though, by all means don't waste your money on it. That's your opinioin, and it's your money.

Geoschmo

Beck December 12th, 2001 06:52 AM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
But that could be said of the AI of virtually any game out there now or in the foreseeable future. Strategy games in particular suffer because by their very nature, there are a huge number of variables. I never expect the AI to produce classic tough games. The AI is a tool to learn the game and to try new strategies for use against human opponents. To me that is the real game and why I purchased it. I agree with Q I would rather see any programming time go to improving the modifications available to modders, etc. than improving an AI to which we would make the needed adjustments to and be back right where we're at now.

jowe01 December 14th, 2001 04:55 PM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
I do not think that SE4's AI is already at a point where it can no longer be significantly improved given the current state of technology. Pacing, remembering claims and dangerous spots, prioritizing targets (what is the most valuable target, which battles will I most probably win and which will I loose ?) and generally improved diplomacy (i.e. less arbitrary), all these are weaknesses which could still be improved if Malfaldor was willing to invest the necessary time. The launch of the Gold edition would be a good moment to tackle these issues because the considerable increase in single-player value would most probably lead to better reviews and thus better sales. Hence, I believe there is a return on the time investment to be earned.

Obviously, the AI matters less in multi-player mode. However, I guess most of the time, SE4 is still played in single player.

Mephisto December 14th, 2001 05:39 PM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
Such massive improvements would require a complete re-write of the code and even MM cannot do this in less than a week...

steveh11 December 14th, 2001 06:32 PM

Re: GOLD A.I. vs old A.I.
 
OK, this is just by tuppenceworth of ramblings:
Poor me, I play exclusively single-player, i.e. against the AI. I still have enourmous fun, since I can set up the game to give me a "fun-and-winnable" game, in much the same way as Civ and it's siblings do.
I have installed - and removed - a couple of mods, and gone back to the 'vanilla' game. Use of the mod-picker *may* make using these simpler, so I may have another play-around with them.
As a single-user only player, PBW, PBEM and TCP/IP are unnecessary frill *for me*. A more interesting AI is much more in my interest. I gather it's not really been tackled, but nevertheless I'll probably get the Gold Version - eventually. EUII will get it first.
Steve.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.