Dominions 2. AI. Suggestions, that how to fix it.

LordArioch · #1 October 29th, 2003, 03:44 AM

I'm not to be trusted near code...but I find the AI should be perhaps more agressive...I have yet to see a computer player take the initive in attacking me so I can deal with them one at a time. If they were more agressive I'd definitely be losing the resultant multi-front war.

Nerfix · #2 October 29th, 2003, 08:14 AM

BTW i just saw AI having army of 110 units... I have also seen armies of 30-50 units several times. The AI also uses province defence a lot. The Machaka AI i played against used blitz forces made out of Spider Riders, Spider Knights and Black Hunters.

[ October 29, 2003, 06:16: Message edited by: Nerfix ]

Saber Cherry · #3 October 29th, 2003, 09:20 AM

Yeah... I'm playing Machaka, with all races on "difficult". Ctis keeps trouncing me, attacking with... oh, around 80 units, on turn 10. This is with default settings (except indies are 5). I keep slaughtering them, but their armies still grow bigger every turn.

I keep finding that gold is a precious commodity in this game! Wow... especially for machaka. Oh, and sacred units are hard to come by, as well. I kind of hoped all Machaka's spiders would be sacred...

-Cherry

Pocus · #4 October 29th, 2003, 10:49 AM

a poster got a very valid point about the AI : the AI dont go enough for quality. This is why we see so many indeps units in the AI armies.

I think the AI algorithm should be refined on what to buy. An ideal proportion of weak troops should be fixed, and recruitment in these weak troops should be stopped when the % is reached.

You can then refine the system by changing the proportion depending on what type of AI level, the type of map, or nation the AI play, but as of now, here is a raw first implementation :

troop quality (TQ) : gold + resource cost

National average of TQ : for each unit (not leader!) type in the national roster, compute TQ. Average it. It gives the average TQ of the nation (Ulm would have a higher TQ than say Ctis IMO). Lets call it NATQ

ideal TQ proportion to be reached:
TQ inf 0.5 NATQ : 20%
0.5 NATQ inf TQ inf 0.9 NATQ : 20 %
0.9 NATQ inf TQ inf 1.3 NATQ : 40%
1.3 NATQ inf TQ : 20%

have to use inf for the inferior sign, as otherwise the post decipher it as an HTML flag

Troop recruitment:
order of province browsing: to be determined smartly. I can post an algo, but this is not my point here, and it have to include a bunch of params.

so ...

get a sorted list of province where the recruitment will take place.
sort each type of troop available, from highest TQ to lowest. if troop Category is in a TQ which is undermanned, recruit 1. Repeat until no more gold, resource, or TQ is ok. Proceed to the next troop type.
Then proceed to the next province.

improvment :
overrides (partial or complete) should be used if the province has a particularly high interest in the 'province which will undertake recruitment list'.

this is very crude. You can refine by splitting desired proportion between main line units, missiles, cavalry, etc.

Pocus · #5 October 29th, 2003, 11:12 AM

forgot something of importance:

Some of you wonder why the tac AI is so good, whereas the strat AI is average.

The main difference lie in a word 'cooperation'. Cooperating mechanisms in AI coding is one of the hardest thing to do well. It is even more difficult that learning behaviors.

A given leader/unit in the tac AI dont cooperate that much with the other. Sure, it evaluate that casting poison clouds everywhere if your army is not poison warded is detrimental, but a simple fitness function can tell him that. The tac Ai, for spell casting for example, browse all the spells at his disposal, and get a numerical appreciation on how the spell would be of interest.
With that in mind, with some serious tweaking and work, you can get a good AI for your mages.

The situation is completely different and much more complex for the strat AI. You cant simply tell him to start with biggest stack, seek the best objective for this army, then proceed to the next. I wont discuss further the issue, but believe me the devs made already a very good job with the dom AI.

so much for the 'why dont they do a strat AI as good as the tac AI'

Aristoteles · #6 October 29th, 2003, 11:18 AM

Yeah the AI should be more aggressive if you are at war with him, also the AI is mainly using cheap - weak units.

Just a question: Can't you guys contact with Adam West from Crosscut about scripting? Maybe he could help you scripting a better strategical AI, if hes got enough time for that.
Just a suggestion..

-Storm- · #7 October 30th, 2003, 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pocus:
forgot something of importance:

Some of you wonder why the tac AI is so good, whereas the strat AI is average.

The main difference lie in a word 'cooperation'. Cooperating mechanisms in AI coding is one of the hardest thing to do well. It is even more difficult that learning behaviors.

A given leader/unit in the tac AI dont cooperate that much with the other. Sure, it evaluate that casting poison clouds everywhere if your army is not poison warded is detrimental, but a simple fitness function can tell him that. The tac Ai, for spell casting for example, browse all the spells at his disposal, and get a numerical appreciation on how the spell would be of interest.
With that in mind, with some serious tweaking and work, you can get a good AI for your mages.

The situation is completely different and much more complex for the strat AI. You cant simply tell him to start with biggest stack, seek the best objective for this army, then proceed to the next. I wont discuss further the issue, but believe me the devs made already a very good job with the dom AI.

so much for the 'why dont they do a strat AI as good as the tac AI'

That is true.
Anyways, the devs will figure out a way to improve the strategic AI, I am sure about that.