The fatal flaws of scripting mages...

Gandalf Parker · #1 April 25th, 2007, 11:58 AM

It sounds like a good idea but I dont know if Kristoffer would go for it.

"Your god tells you to do xxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx but in battle you decide to do it abit differently"
makes more sense thematically than
"Your god tells you to do absolutely nothing in combat"

You could make a stronger case for
"Your god tells you to do xxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx and even though it seems stupid during the battle you do it anyway because you are more afraid of angering your god than the idea of dying".

Actually, the strongest case of all would be to examine the game log and see where you feel the logic failed. The mage goes thru a huge list of spells rating them. Maybe the rating could be tweaked in a way that will work (for all nations)

Sombre · #2 April 25th, 2007, 12:19 PM

Why does it have to be god telling them what to do? Why can't the scripting just represent the mage deciding something?

This is a gameplay deal, not much to do with 'realism' or 'thematics'.

thejeff · #3 April 25th, 2007, 12:21 PM

And what does it mean to follow the script exactly. Should the mage cast attack spells with nothing in range? Blessings when everyone is already blessed (or no sacred units present)? Mind duel with no enemy astral mages? Etc, etc.

Better (though more developer work) would be to improve the "Is this enemy force worth wasting gems on?" logic. That seems to be where most of the problems lie.

Sombre · #4 April 25th, 2007, 12:25 PM

I don't think people have a problem with the casting AI deviating if the scripted stuff isn't possible (they might, but it's certainly a lesser problem). It's more that the AI has spells scripted that are possible and entirely sensible, but decides to do its own thing anyway and gets killed.

thejeff · #5 April 25th, 2007, 12:57 PM

The only cases of the AI deviating that I know of come down to either not possible or gem use.
Not possible is usually not in range.

The gem use is a real problem, but I still think the better solution is to improve the "enemy strength" algorithm.

I don't like the AI scripting on/off idea.
In the original example, you could just teleport in a cheap mage with hold/hold/retreat to burn his gems if he has scripting off, followed by the Mind Lord who will slaughter them because they have no gems left. If he leaves scripting on, they don't follow the script for the cheap mage or the Aboleth and die anyway.

It just means you have to work a little hard to exploit the problem. It doesn't fix it.

Sombre · #6 April 25th, 2007, 01:02 PM

The AI appears to deviate even if the spell is possible and you have the gems to power it if it decides the spell isn't a good idea. I don't have an example of this to hand, but numerous people have reported it.

Gandalf Parker · #7 April 25th, 2007, 04:16 PM

Hmm I use hellbind heart quite abit against one unit and havent had a problem. Maybe the mage was set too far back on the battlefield? (I dont remember the range settings on that)

Baalz · #8 April 25th, 2007, 04:22 PM

Both mages were set all the way forward, enemy mage was scripted to hold X5 (it was an agreed up trade).

Baalz · #9 April 25th, 2007, 01:02 PM

Yeah, another example I ran afoul of in another game was the AI deciding not to "waste" blood slaves casting hell bind heart as I had scripted...after all it's just one guy they were fighting! >:/

What's especially messed up in the fight Bob's talking about is after disregarding his orders to cast friendly currents, the AI decided to go ahead and spend the gems summoning sharks. Talk about adding insult to injury. Well, at least there was a funny stalemate where the Mage of the Deep kept my frost immune (from breath of winter) aboleth permanently encased in ice while the breath of winter caused him to be surrounded by passed out militia and the only damage being dealt was "holy avenger" being triggered on the (passed out) mother of the deep by breath of winter.

alexti · #10 April 26th, 2007, 02:23 AM

Quote:

Gandalf Parker said:
It sounds like a good idea but I dont know if Kristoffer would go for it.

"Your god tells you to do xxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx but in battle you decide to do it abit differently"
makes more sense thematically than
"Your god tells you to do absolutely nothing in combat"

You could make a stronger case for
"Your god tells you to do xxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx and even though it seems stupid during the battle you do it anyway because you are more afraid of angering your god than the idea of dying".

Maybe it should be tied to the dominion? So for example, if Dominion is 1 the mage would think "Ok, maybe the god exists, but what he knows about the combat? I'm not spending gems on that Rain of Stones he has divined to cast - our Tartarian army should take care of that lone hawk". With dominion 10 it would be different story: "That lone hawk doesn't seem to be too dangerous to us, but what do I, mere mortal, know - God must have his divine plans - Rain of Stones it is!"