Dominions 2. AI. Suggestions, that how to fix it. - Page 21

Gandalf Parker · #**201** November 8th, 2003, 01:56 PM

Actually I am 99% a solo player. But the game was built almost entirely around PBEM with some things tossed in for solo play. I dont forsee a major time-consuming rewrite for SP moving to the top of the list over many many MP items. Small tweaks, yes. But once it looked like it would not be simple I stopped considering it likely.

However, there are always major points to be made in that scoring process for personal interest by a dev.

[ November 08, 2003, 13:01: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

DominionsFan · #**202** November 8th, 2003, 05:50 PM

Hey! The AI is NOT THAT BAD Gandalf, it need lot of tweaking but that's all. I think the devs can update those things from the list, without too many problems.

Gandalf Parker · #**203** November 8th, 2003, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DominionsFAN:
Hey! The AI is NOT THAT BAD Gandalf, it need lot of tweaking but that's all. I think the devs can update those things from the list, without too many problems.

The tweakings is what I mean. That IS what we should pursue. Its the projects such as seperate AI scripting or tactics specific to a nation that we might not see soon.

As for the tweakings I think we will need to get more specific. Just saying "more hvy units" by itself isnt a fix. The AI is no better with a few hvy units than it was with alot of cheap ones. When we put up some specific percentages that helped although that would hurt some races. When we gave specifics on when the AI should consider another castle that was closer.

[ November 08, 2003, 16:47: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Aristoteles · #**204** November 9th, 2003, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:

quote:
Originally posted by DominionsFAN:
Hey! The AI is NOT THAT BAD Gandalf, it need lot of tweaking but that's all. I think the devs can update those things from the list, without too many problems.

The tweakings is what I mean. That IS what we should pursue. Its the projects such as seperate AI scripting or tactics specific to a nation that we might not see soon.

As for the tweakings I think we will need to get more specific. Just saying "more hvy units" by itself isnt a fix. The AI is no better with a few hvy units than it was with alot of cheap ones. When we put up some specific percentages that helped although that would hurt some races. When we gave specifics on when the AI should consider another castle that was closer.

Well, than what would you suggest? Since the AI won't use too many heavy units in the demo, it is clear that we must make a suggestion about it. I think this is a 'quite simple' example, we cannot post too many details about this one...or can we?

Aristoteles · #**205** November 9th, 2003, 10:40 AM

A little update:

THE "AI WEAKNESSES" LIST:
1. The AI is massing weak troops
2. The AI won't protect his pretender/commanders/priests/mages
3. The AI won't build forts, maybe 1-2 max, but that is very rare as well.
4. The AI's battlefield tactics could be better
((Example: You can use a few units and put them to the front, the AI will attack them with full force more than likely. Usually the AI's own missile units will kill some or more of its melee units.))
5. The AI is making very odd things. IE. wandering around with his pretender alone from province to province ((the pretender is surely not doing anything, since it is moving in all turns. - and it is doing this in the border provinces! - the AI pretenders are all dead before turn 20-40 ususally.))
6. The AI won't stay in a province, it is always moving his armies.
7. The AI won't make complex strategic maneuvers. IE. Making a focused attack against a province.
8. The AI won't equip his supercombatants..at least I've never seen that in the demo.
9. The AI is building too many temples ((??????? This is good or bad, I cannot decide.))
10. The AI won't search for magical sites? ((I am not exactly sure, but I have never noticed, that the AI searched for magical sites.))

[ November 09, 2003, 08:44: Message edited by: Aristoteles ]

Nerfix · #**206** November 9th, 2003, 03:04 PM

One thing i noticed today:
The AI doesn't play Rainbow mage type pretenders very well:
I saw a Frost Father with 7 in Astral, 3 in Earth and 1 in Water and a Arch Mage with 6 in ir, 3 in Fire and 1 in Earth.
The thing is, those pretenders were very expensive in design points. The AI had poor scales and Mausoleums as forts.

Gandalf Parker · #**207** November 9th, 2003, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aristoteles:
Well, than what would you suggest? Since the AI won't use too many heavy units in the demo, it is clear that we must make a suggestion about it. I think this is a 'quite simple' example, we cannot post too many details about this one...or can we?

WHAT AI doesnt use enough hvy troops? WHAT hvy troops do you wish he would use? What percentage? Maybe we could use the mini map to figure out if that is even a good idea and what nations its a good idea for. Definetly not all of them. Some nations would definetly go from decent to sucky if they used more hvy troops (Pangaea being a big example). And most nations would regret it as a general rule if it was too expensive a move. Is a few hvy troops better than alot of cheap ones in most cases?

The Posts talking about setting hvy troops to 10% of the army made some sense. But Im taking for granted they meant hvy infantry to be mixed in with the lite infantry. Does it also mean that they should have 10% hvy cavalry? Is that 10% of the whole army or 10% of a mounted army? Should they have a walking army where 10% of it is hvy troops AND a mounted army where 10% is hvy troops (with... what was it? 60% lite mounted?)

Gandalf Parker · #**208** November 9th, 2003, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nerfix:
One thing i noticed today:
The AI doesn't play Rainbow mage type pretenders very well:
I saw a Frost Father with 7 in Astral, 3 in Earth and 1 in Water and a Arch Mage with 6 in ir, 3 in Fire and 1 in Earth.
The thing is, those pretenders were very expensive in design points. The AI had poor scales and Mausoleums as forts.

What meant they didnt do it well? It wasnt a good choice for a demo game since Rainbow Mages are a strategy that bears fruit late in the game. How do you feel the AI should have done it. Oh and what race had this pretender since that can make a big difference.

Nerfix · #**209** November 9th, 2003, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
What meant they didnt do it well? It wasnt a good choice for a demo game since Rainbow Mages are a strategy that bears fruit late in the game. How do you feel the AI should have done it. Oh and what race had this pretender since that can make a big difference.

They spent huge amounts of design points on those pretenders. They had poor forts and negative scales.

Uhhhh, sir, we are talking bout' RB Mages with 7 in one path... Getting to 4 in one is hard and expensive enough with a RB Mage pretender
I usualy take 1-3 of every path with my RB pretenders. It may not be the best choice, but it is less expensive that taking 7 in one path with pretender like Crone.

Pythium had the Frost Father and Vanheim had the Arch Mage.

[ November 09, 2003, 14:42: Message edited by: Nerfix ]

Taqwus · #**210** November 9th, 2003, 07:43 PM

The AI should pay more attention to supply lines and the risk of strategic encirclement.

If it's going to risk being cut off, it really should make an attempt to forge supply items and bring them along (which requires nature magic; perhaps AIs should make more use of indy druids et al). This is particularly true when using troops with a low base morale, because of the 4 point penalty...

e.g. Last night playing the demo solo as Jotunheim (Utgard theme), I found and attacked the Machakans. At one point, they attacked a forward fort of mine. Their sieging force, mostly Machakan light foot with spider knights, was adjacent to only one Machakan-held province, which in turn was adjacent to their only castle (Machaka itself). In this single-province bridge lay another Machakan force led by the spider lady herself. Next to this bridge lay my main force.

The next turn, my main army (led by my Son of Niefel, fairly small but composed mostly of giants and with a number of Skratti and Godes et al) attacked -- not the besiegers, but the bridge. The Machakan force on that bridge, before the attack hit, joined the besiegers. That meant that the besiegers, while they were now making decent progress against the walls, were completely surrounded -- and I annihilated them the following turn, as the morale-4 troops were trivial to rout. Well in excess of half of the total Machakan armed forces, including a decent national hero, were obliterated at little cost since they had nowhere to run... That made it far easier to take Machaka a couple of turns later.