Strategic vs. Tactical AI

[proteus]

Nop, I am never playing Ulm.
I think you've got some point again Mr. Parker.
It is too simple to say things like this..
eh my post was a little far away from 'detailed'.
Well I was subjective as well. Iam never using light infantry for example, maybe others do.
Also I found lot spells not worth to cast, thus I am never using them. I am operating with my favourite spells all the time, and they are working great. However those are specific strategies, I dont think that it is a way for the AI...well maybe, but than the AI personalities/race specific strategies coming in, what would be hellish hard to code I guess.

[ May 11, 2004, 14:47: Message edited by: proteus ]

[Gandalf Parker]

Tris: interesting breakdown. Im not sure how it would be done for this game without alot of rewrite.

For the standard player tactic to be available for the AI it would need to build scouts and send them out. But sending them "out" would need some code for selecting provinces.

Then if the scout finds someone the army would need to do the same thing. And to do it intelligently would mean wavering to go around difficult provinces, but not too wide from the course.

Then we are back to having different nations using different tactics. For Caelum to use this tactic well would mean recognizing that they can choose provinces without having to take them in a direct walk (they can fly over hard provinces). For Pangaea to avoid doing a "stupid AI" thing they would need to realize that they can march straight there without taking any of the provinces in between. For either Caelum or Pangaea to do it in an Ulm fashion would be stupid and weakening to them.

Random wandering of scouts and armies might still have a better "score". Yes it makes it easy to campaign against them, and makes it hard for the AI to win the game, but intelligent choices by the AI would be even easier to beat.

[Tris]

Grrrr.... you're too smart for my ideas own good, Mr Parker :-)

I see your point. There would be problems implementing some of the behaviour desirable in following the strategies. I did specify the strategies could be chosen from a pool set for that nation.

A few (non ideal, but hopefully useful, behaviour patterns:

Scout Behaviour - look at all adjacent provinces. Try to move further from your own capital, favouring enemy territories over neutral ones.

Army Behaviour - (if you have a 60% or better chance of beating the largest army your scout has found)

(If not entirely stealthy army)
Look at shortest route to enemy castle. Look at all routes which take up to 20% longer (eg if shortest route is 5, look at all 5 or 6 province routes) Rate according to strength of strongest province. Go via route with lowest high-strength province.

Well, you get the idea. An alternate (and perhaps less predictable) method is to assign "desire values" to each action an army can take, giving each some random weighting, then acting on most desirable. This would let the AI switch between strategies on the fly, expanding its holdings early on, and if it spotted a weak enemy capital close by, sending an army at it.

Eg
If enemy castle found and within 5 turns then desire{push towards castle} = %chance of beating strongest enemy army/10.

If limiting factor on troop deployment at capital is gold then desire{take province} = (gold income of province/20)*chance of winning vs defenders.

and so on. Ok, this would be hard to implement :-) I wish I was an expert programmer - I'd offer my help. As it is

10 print "Tris is cool"
20 goto 10

is about the limit of my coding ability.