[Taqwus]

There are fairly obvious data protection issues -- notably, providing an object that encapsulates *just* the information 'legally' accessible to the AI; and which provides no write-access, just a structure for queuing orders (incl. 'instant' orders like equipment moves or alchemy). It would be up to the implementation to cache historical data.

As for complexity, it would be incredibly complicated given the sheer variety of options.

Example domain where traditional AI techniques can work pretty well: driving on an empty road, maintaining lane position. The input (typically low-resolution imagery) is relatively constrained; edge-detection for the lines is reasonably well-understood; the state does not normally radically shift due to previously hidden information; and the controls (actuators) are relatively few -- steering, accelerating, breaking, shifting -- and responsive (less need for long-term planning). Credit assignment problems are usually minor.

Complex multi-player games with vast amounts of hidden information, mandatory long-term planning as some things take a long time to pay off, high randomness and configurability, and a ridiculous number of options are not easy to automate. It's difficult when it's not even obvious -why- one won or lost (credit assignment). This why AIs for even simpler games like GalCiv cheat like hell.

(Ex -- GalCiv knows where all the yellow suns are. These have the best colonization opportunies, thus eliminating much of the exploration problem. The game also cheats by biasing "random" events against the leaders. This is despite the far lower complexity. The whole Civ series is notorious for AI cheating -- ex. AIs trading tech with each other for a pittance compared to what they'll accept from any human, knowing where you are, knowing exactly what tech you have, etc -- and, if memory serves, punish-the-leader adjustments. And so forth.)