AI needs to be MUCH more aggressive

Jubala · #1 June 18th, 2001, 12:33 PM

True, the EU AI can also make stupid decisions. But you can't accuse it of not being aggressive and following up on attacks. I once played as Sweden (of course) and Russia declared war on me (of course) and Turkey that was in the same alliance as Russia also declared war on me. I figured I didn't have to worry about Turkey much since they wheren't exactly my next door neighbour if you know what I mean. A couple of months after the war started a Turkish fleet is sighted off the coast of Gothenburg and promptly lands a force of about 45 000 men. Very surprising and very bad since the bulk of my army was off fighting in Russia. I sent my fleet to chase away the Turkish fleet and took some loans to raise a new army in Stockholm to smash the Turks. Took me awhile and some chasing, but I finally got rid of them. Imo the EU AI is better than the SE4 at going after a goal so to speak.

DirectorTsaarx · #2 June 18th, 2001, 10:10 PM

The AI build files should also include the ability to respond to enemy designs. The game already allows tracking of other race's technology; it should be straightforward to include certain areas in the AI state. For instance, if an enemy has seeker or fighter tech, change AI state to "war_seekers" and build ships with extra PD. The problem here is when multiple enemies are encountered, each with different weapon mixes; in that case, the AI would have to be able to build different sets of ships at appropriate locations. I have no idea how to script that within the current framework.

As for pressing an attack, I've seen the AI be very persistent with attacking border systems. Unfortunately, I've never given the AI a chance to extend its attack, because I haven't given up a system (yet). However, I agree that the first order of business for an AI at war should be sending a fleet to my closest known planet, glassing/invading that planet, and then exploring the warp points in that system to find the next planet. I think one of the reasons the AI isn't doing that now is that other ministers pre-empt fleet orders, so that a given fleet is ordered to attack one location, and then the next turn is ordered elsewhere to respond to some other "crisis" that would be better met by either creating another fleet or redirecting a different fleet. As others have said, the AI needs to "remember" from turn to turn what it's objectives are, and what fleets are responding to that objective.

Beck · #3 June 18th, 2001, 11:21 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Jubala:
True, the EU AI can also make stupid decisions. But you can't accuse it of not being aggressive and following up on attacks.

I wasn't accusing it of that, The Austrians were certainly aggressive, if stupid. But it is uneven. I had the French declare war on me (English) early in the game and attempt to take Calais. Over a period of months there were a furious set of battles with several provinces changing hands several times. Though I had captured two provinces to none lost, I was on the ropes having only a force numbering 23,000 left on the continent with no prospects of reinforcing them. Meanwhile France was bringing up several large armies in excess of 70,000 troops each. So what does he do, he offers a peace treaty surrendering to me the provinces I had captured which I immediately accepted. That would have never have happened against a human who would have pressed his advantage, surely to the point of retaking the lost provinces if not kicking me out of Calais altogether. That 23,000 was all I had left to prevent his victory.

quote:
Imo the EU AI is better than the SE4 at going after a goal so to speak.

I would agree to a point. What I'm not sure of is how much of that "going after a goal" is due to the RTS nature of the game? How frequently did it evaluate making changes to those goals? SE4 is turn-based and essentially it makes that evaluation every turn. There were many times the EU AI clearly did not follow through when any human would have and to me that is part of the going after a goal such as above. Did it suffer from a memory lapse same as SE4 due to a re-evaluation of its goals? Clearly SE4 would benefit from some ability to recognize a goal and remember what it was doing in future turns.

Lucanos · #4 June 19th, 2001, 02:21 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Beck:
I would agree to a point. What I'm not sure of is how much of that "going after a goal" is due to the RTS nature of the game?

Some say that the AI is unable to "remember". How could it have a goal if it can't remember?

Dr Strangelove · #5 June 20th, 2001, 05:17 AM

A major problem I've noticed with the AI is its inability to properly deal with black hole systems. I've seen aggressive AIs waste their entire offensive strength trying to cross a black hole to get to me. It's true that sometimes I've been able to use a black hole system to get at an enemy by giving my ships sufficient armor and carefuly plottting the move to get across in as few turns as possible, but the AI doesn't seem to be able to do this. Has anyone tried editing out all blackholes just to seee if the performance of the AI improves?

raynor · #6 June 20th, 2001, 06:30 AM

Take a look over in the Mod Forum. Daynarr created a good mod that eliminates black holes. The AI is horrible at dealing with them.