Note from MM - AI MODDERS MUST READ THIS

[jpinard]

OK guys, I have 2 Messages I received from Aaron. Read them both below, and he'd like to hear back from me ASAP. Please, NO nasty comments here. Just the highest ranking AI concerns plus fixes we've created and they(MM) will include them in the next patch slated for the end of January. Respond below and I'll put together a comprehensive e-mail for Aaron.

E-Mail #1: You guys have been doing tremendous work in the development of new areas
for SE4. We applaud your efforts. Please spread the word that if there's
anything you need added to the game to help your developments, just email
us.

Aaron

E-Mail #2: Is there a list of the current AI concerns? We've got a ton of different
issues to sort through and we weren't aware that AI was a high ranking
one. Send it in and we'll get right on it. We're hoping to have another
patch out by the end of this month.

Aaron

[Dracus]

I have one issue with the AI.
They never seem to do anything they agree to:
ex---ask them to leave a planet, they respond that they will but they never do.
ask them to declare war on another AI, they say the will, but never do.

[DirkHowitzer]

It would be nice if the AI were generally more aggressive in several areas...diplomacy, offensive ops, colonization, etc...they seem very passive. And...I don't know if it is possible to do this or not, but could a water world be added to the world types?
------------------

"He's dead, Jim."-- Lt. Commander Leonard "Bones" McCoy |Chief Medical Officer / USS Enterprise (NCC-1701)

[This message has been edited by DirkHowitzer (edited 13 January 2001).]

[This message has been edited by DirkHowitzer (edited 13 January 2001).]

[Kimball]

I like to see the AI ally themselves with each other more. That would make the game a little tougher.

[Mephisto]

Ok, I focus on things that are important for me as a MODDER. "Fixing" these will greatly improve the MODs that I can do.

It's somewhat of a long list but most things are not very hard to fix and only need small code fixes if any at all.

1.) ECM/Combat Sensors broken. This is caused by a "misspelling" in all design files. It momentarily reads "combat to hit add" or "combat to hit dec" but should read "combat to hit offense plus" and "combat to hit defense plus".

2.) The RaceName_AI_Strategies.txt are not working, the AI will always use Default_AI_Strategies.txt even so a RaceName_AI_Strategies.txt is placed in the race folder.

3.) The name file (at least the “states.txt”) is to small. The AI runs out of names and stops building new designs altogether. Just increase the design name addendum from 10 to 20 and it should work again (or just add more states :-)).

4.) When the design AI should fill up with shields, it will do so with shield generators every time but should use phased shield generators if available.

5.) Make the AI fill up the Last free tons of tonnage with armor. Currently the AI sometime leaves 20 t of space empty because neither a shield generator nor armor above tech level 4 fits in.

6.) An option to tell the AI which armor to use in its designs would be great.

7.) Spelling inconsistency: All resources are plural (i.e. “resource generation mineral -s- “) except for the mineral storage where it is singular (i.e. “resource storage mineral”). A typo here provokes an “Index Error”.

8.) Add a line “Use master computer if available” in the design files. At the moment you cannot prevent the AI from designing ships with bridges, life support and crew quarters.

9.) Give us the ability to add a computer virus like a point defense weapon to a design.

10.) Fix the engine “bug”. Currently the AI does not invoke the design routine when researching new engines. This seems to be related to the roman numerals in the components.txt. Every more advanced engine needs a higher roman numeral then the engine before.

11.) The empire AI should scrap old units (fighters, weapon platforms) to gain cargo space making room for the new designs.

12.) Atmospheric Converter: The AI should check if the planet already has the desired atmosphere and skip building the facility. It should also scrap the facility if the desired atmosphere has been produced.

13.) A small routine that prevents the AI from spending more then 50% or so of its income on building facilities. Currently the AI can disable itself by upgrading large amounts of facilities and running out of resources. In this case the Ai will scrap/abandon its ships and that leaves them without defense.

13.) The AI should use all remaining points between the maintenance max. and the actually income to build units (if storage is already full). At the moment the AI stops building units if it has reached its maintenance max. even so there are resources left and units don’t cost maintenance.

14.) When assigning orders from the AI_Construction_Vehicles.txt, the AI should try to assign as many as production facilities and resources allow. I.e. when the AI should build 10 cruisers and has only 5 space yards it should order 5 cruisers and go on searching for a unit production and assign them in effect building both, cruisers and units, at the same time.

15.) Give WPs a range modifier like Bases.

[Daynarr]

Ok, here is some more:

1) Spelling for Kamikaze ship default tactic is wrong; it says Ram instead of Kamikaze (as stated in defaultstrategies.txt), which makes Kamikaze ships use Optimal Firing Range tactic instead.

2) Since AI makes a large number of designs, he often uses up all his available names and stops making new designs (as stated by Mephisto). I would propose that they change AI naming system from roman numeral (I, II, III etc.) to something like Mkxxx (where xxx would be a number from 1 to 255). E.g. 'Eagle I' ship will be named 'Eagle Mk1'. That will give AI much more room to make designs, and shouldn't be too hard to do.

3) AI should never build units on planets if there is no storage left on it. Right now, when there is no room on planet, all excess units are:
1- simply not built
2- put on a cargo hold of some orbiting transport or colonizer
As a result that transport just stands there whole time doing nothing, probably because the AI doesn't know how to handle that cargo.

4) Bases should always be placed between the closest attacker group and planet. The remaining bases should be symmetrically distributed around planet. Bases should be closer to planet (2 spaces away max).

5) There should be ability to place Satellites on legal spaces before combat (SE3 like), and should be able to split them in Groups (AI should be splitting them like fighters. The number could be specified in Races_Default_Strategies.txt for each race).

6) AI should be scrapping some facilities to make room for the new ones. I.e. he needs to scrap 1 research facility in order to make Central Computer Complex.

7) Combat initiative. Right now Player always moves first in tactical which puts AI in great disadvantage if the fleets are close at the start of combat. Initiative could be based on speed and initiative and should be separate for each ship in combat.

8) AI needs to choose it planet types better. He assigns too often low resource planets for mining, and high resource mining for research and intelligence. It really hurts AI.

[This message has been edited by Daynarr (edited 13 January 2001).]

[Emperor Zodd]

Currently during combat when the leader in a formation is destroyed,the rest of the ships break formation. They shouldn't wait for the leader to be destroyed to break formation.

When the leader has it's speed reduced from damage,a new leader should be chosen that has no damage to it's engines,or the formation is just broken up(which I prefer).

[Eisenhans]

The AI doesn't know how to handle "known" minefields. This way it keeps on sending ship after ship crippling itself. It should stack minesweepers as well.
The first time the AI runs into a minefield at a certain place, a flag should be set "this way there are mines to be expected" and it should change movement strategy (bigger fleets).
I don't know if this can be done easily but perhaps it would be useful to make the AI use "MINESCOUTS", i.e. cheap ships that fly around searching for minefields in a region where it encountered mines before. Then it could send a fleet with sweepers. Or at least a minefield would become "known" without loosing an entire fleet. Strategy: first the scout then the fleet.

(P.S.: I'd like to have mines mopped up a bit anyway. See thread "mines could add game depth")

[This message has been edited by Eisenhans (edited 13 January 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Eisenhans (edited 13 January 2001).]

Just one more thing: AI needs to use different populations in a better way to get more undomed planets.

[This message has been edited by Eisenhans (edited 13 January 2001).]

[LintMan]

I'd like to add some more AI issues

1) The AI keeps sending ships and fleets into known minefields. If if hasn't swept the field, it shouldn't send any ships into it. (I'd also like the computer routing of my own ships to avoid entering known minefields, which I'm not sure it does right now).

2) The AI never seems to use troops to capture planets.

3) The AI doesn't seem to invest in enough research facilities when it is doing peaceful expansion, so on large maps or ones with few opponents (and thus long peacetime expansions), the AI gets way behind on research.

4) The AI often doesn't press its advantage when it has it. For instance, an AI at war with me entered a system I own with 2 newly colonized, undefended planets. The next turn, its cruiser just left the system without attacking, giving me time to build up defenses there.

5) The path routing for ships should be intelligent enough for the ships to know to make small detours to resupply (if possible) on trips it will not have enough supply to reach otherwise. (That goes for both the AI races' ships, and ships the player sends). In general, the AI needs to be smarter about range and shouldn't send out colony ships that have a 200 turn ETA because its detination is out of range. (It should be able to figure out whether the ship has enough range and send along a supply ship escort, or build resupply bases along the way first.)

[Barnacle Bill]

Most people's complaints about the AI seem to focus on "it does stupid things" and "it isn't tough enough". While I welcome improvements in that regard, those deficiencies bother me less because I am not a multiplayer gamer and my play style focuses more on internal development of my empire & roleplaying the part of an emperor than on "winning the game". I see conflict in this sort of game as something that should happen because two empires want the same system, rather than the "Last man standing - eliminate the other players one by one" style of a multiplayer game. So, I want AI that acts like the leaders of real-life countries who, aside from the occasional Hitler/Napoleon/Axexander type, do not act like players in a "winning means conquering the map" wargame. I'm not really looking for AI that is competative in a "Last man standing" game, because I don't play that way myself. Frankly, I turn off all the optional victory conditions in SE4 so that the game won't end until/unless somebody is the "Last man standing", but I don't play to achieve that result and usually decide to start a new game long before anybody achieves it. That doesn't mean I don't want any AI, or competent AI. AI that acts corretly is important to suspended disbelief. It is just that different things about the AI bug me than if I wanted it to better imitate human game players rather than human national leaders.

With the above in mind, the number one thing that bugs me is the inability to defend your territory against your "allies". This causes me to avoid agreeing to treaties above Non-Intercourse, making all those other treaties useless. After all, NAFTA doesn't mean the US government is free to found cities in British Columbia or the US Border Patrol throws our southern border open to Mexican migration. Similarly, even if the AI agrees to "give" you a system, they always reclaim it in a turn or two. Hence, the following proposed changes to diplomacy & related "rules":

Change the "claim all systems you colonize" selection in Empire Options to "claim all uninhabited systems you explore unless claimed by an ally". "Ally" in this context meaning Non-Aggression or better, including Protectorate & Subjugation. The AI would act as if this option was selected.

You can't colonize or invade a planet in any system unless you claim it first.

Eliminate the "no treaty" diplomatic status. The default upon first contact is "Non-Intercourse".

When a treaty proposal or trade proposal including a treaty is transmitted, the terms automatically include recognition of all current system claims by the other. However, any contested systems remain contested (see below). Once a treaty above Non-Intercourse is agreed to, neither side can thereafter claim any system the other has already claimed as long as the treaty Lasts.

For contested systems, it is "no peace beyond the line" within the contested system. Mines in contested systems will detonate on your allies (too dumb to be selective about whether or not to detonate, but mines should be useful in the "limited war" within a contested system). Ships, by default, would not initiate combat when entering a sector in a contested system containing something other than mines belonging to the other party. However, they could initiate combat within the contested system if desired via the "attack" order, no matter what treaty is in effect. Damage inflicted on the AI within a contested system does not make the AI as angry as it would if inflicted in Non-Intercourse or War, since limited conflict within the contested system is expected.

If you "give" a system to another race, that abandons your claim to it and automatically transfers ownership of any colonies you have in it. If you separately "give" some but not all planets in a system without giving the system, that converts it to a contested system if it was not already. How much stake it has in the system, in terms of number & size of colonies, would heavily influence the AI in deciding to accept or reject proposals that it give up contested systems.

Any party to a treaty could unilaterally downgrade it one or more levels (Subjugation downgrading one level to Protectorate, Protectorate to Non-Intercourse). Each treaty level except the "unequal" ones (Protectorate & Subjugation) would have a minimum level of the AI's attitude toward the other party. If the minimum attitude or better does not exist for a given treaty level, the AI will neither propose or accept that level of treaty. However, having the minimum level should not guarantee acceptance, and the higher their attitude is above the minimum the more likely they should be to accept. If the AI's attitude toward its ally drops below the minimum for their current treaty, the AI should automatically downgrade the treaty.

For the "unequal" treaties, how the AI feels about you would not matter. It's decision making about accepting or downgrading treaties would be based on a comparison of your fleet's combat strength (ships only) to its overall military strength. On the other hand, if it's fleet is strong enough compared to your overall military strength, the AI should propose Protectorate or Subjugation to you! Certain levels of military strength comparison would also offset AI dislike for purposes of accepting or not downgrading "equal" treaties. In other words, if the AI is "intimidated" by you it might not risk angering you by refusing or downgrading a treaty that it doesn't like you enough for under normal circumstances.

When deciding anything involving "intimidation", the AI should also take into account the strength of both its Military Allies, Partners & Subjects and yours. It will also take into account distance between the nearest systems of the two parties or their Military Allies/Partners/Subjects (somebody big on the other side of the galaxy with lots of other races in between is not very intimidating).

A Partnership treaty would require that there be no contested systems between the two parties, or that all remaining contested systems to be resolved as part of the trade including the treaty offer.

Alternately, Partnership would change the rule about claims and colonization. In this alternative, you could colonize in any system claimed by either yourself or your partner, any system of your Partner's that you colonize in automatically becomes claimed by you & contested thereby, and combat in contested systems between partners is not allowed (including mines).

In addition to the 20% tariff, Protectorate would preclude the weaker side from attacking the stronger even in contested systems (including mines), but the stronger side could still attack the weaker (again including mines). The weaker side could conclude Non-Intercourse or Non-Aggression treaties with any third party with which the stronger side is not at war, or Non-Intercourse with third parties with which the stronger is at war. However, the weaker side can downgrade the Protectorate to Non-Intercourse in order to accept a treaty with a third party. If the weaker side is at war with a third party when it agrees to the Protectorate, the war automatically ends in a Non-Intercourse treaty unless the third party is already at war with the stronger side. If any third party declares war on the weaker side, this automatically declares war on the stronger (which should be taken into account by third party AI when deciding on war). The AI would only propose becoming your Protectorate if it will save them from having to agree to the same (or worse) with another race they like less than you. In that case, the new treaty does not end the war but rather puts you at war with the third party, and your Protectorate cannot unilaterally downgrade the treaty as long as the war Lasts.

Subjugation would work like Protectorate except 40% tariff, the weaker side automatically goes to war with anybody the stronger side does, the stronger side "sees" all systems the weaker side can see, and the stronger side can resupply at the weaker side's resupply depots.

If you propose Subjugation or demand Surrender and the AI is not "intimidated" enough to accept, but would have accepted Protectorate, it should counter-offer Protectorate. The same thing should apply if you demand Surrender and the AI is not "intimidated" enough to agree, but would have accepted Subjugation.

If "Mega Evil Empire" is enabled in "Settings.txt", if the conditions for declaring a Mega Evil Empire (MEE) are met then all the AI's who are not the MEE's Protectorates or Subjects sign a Military Alliance. Individual pairs within the Alliance will retain any pre-Alliance Partnerships, and can agree to new ones while the Alliance is in force if they like each other enough. The Mega Evil Empire's Protectorates & Subjects will weigh the ratio of strength between the two on an ongoing basis to decide whether to downgrade their treaty with the MEE and join the Alliance. However, members of the Alliance will weigh the combined strength of the Alliance against that of the MEE when deciding whether to accept offers/demands from the MEE for "unequal treaties" or Surrender, and may accept if the MEE is strong enough. Aside from accepting such offers/demands from the MEE, though, Alliance members will never downgrade their treaties with each other below Military Alliance as long as the Alliance is still in force. If the MEE declares war on any member of the Alliance (or is at war with any member when the Alliance is formed), all other Alliance members will immediately declare war on the MEE. If no Alliance member is at war with the MEE when the Alliance is formed and the MEE does not declare war on any of them, the Alliance will decide collectively each turn whether they all declare war on the MEE or keep the peace (by some function of the attitude of each Alliance member weighted by its contribution to total Alliance strength). If the Alliance keeps the peace, its members will downgrade any individual treaty with the MEE to Non-Intercourse. If the MEE is at war with the Alliance and offers Non-Aggression to any Alliance member, the same function would be used to determine whether it is accepted, and if accepted all Alliance members go to Non-Aggression with the MEE together. Offers other than Non-Intercourse or "unequal treaties" from the MEE will be ignored by Alliance members. However, if the relative strength of the MEE falls to the point that the conditions for having an MEE are no longer met, then the Alliance disolves and there is no MEE until/unless the conditions are met again later in the game (by the same race or a different one). If the Alliance disolves, the relationship between each pair of Alliance members drops to the highest allowed by their current mutual like or dislike. Formation and disolving of the Alliance, as well as individual defections to/from the Alliance, should be announced via Messages in the log. Alliance membership should also show on the treaty grid and the main diplomacy screen as "Anti-Whoever Alliance", where "Whoever" is the name of the race which is the current MEE.