Wanted: Cheating AI

[Willgamer]

A search didn't reveal a direct hit on this, so in the interest of hearing a good discussion:

I want an AI that CHEATS!

Please try to consider the following points even as you launch your broadsides.....

* the term cheat is rather broad; is it:
1. giving the computer a headstart in the
pregame options.
2. giving 1 player (randomly, but usually
not the human) a sweet spot start.
3. looking (ala Shogun) at the human
player's move and reacting accordingly.
4. revealing via Reports screens much data
that is useless to humans, but great for
computers.
5. computer players ganging up on the
human player.
6. computer players access to human player
data that's blatantly obvious.
7. computer player access to human player
data that isn't obvious (ie. if you
can't discover cheating, is it?)
8. add your own ideas here.....

* is enjoying a game derived from the actual gameplay, your perception of how that gameplay was produced or both??????

After many years of strategy gaming, I now prefer #7. As long as I can't readily detect cheating, I'll take the best possible gameplay. Yes I know the bright bulbs out there will eventually tell me how the computer did it, but until then, I paid for a ticket, so just entertain me!

Anyone else for a little less honest AI?

[Danny]

What I'd like is to make a super empire with everything at max, and all the racial bonus.

------------------
I AM Canadian.

[Daynarr]

I have played Red Alert II recently and was really PO by AI there. Man, that AI cheats big time, covering almost all points you mentioned there, and more.
IMO cheating AI as a standard AI in the game is just a product of laziness of programmers.
However, cheating AI as a option can be a good addition to the game like SE4 because it will provide more challenge to the more advanced players (like playing on impossible level in MOO2). Maybe adding some new options for cheating (in SE3 you could select how many planets and what tech level AI has in the start) would be welcome addition to the game and make it more interesting and longer Lasting.

[Instar]

It is possible to give the AI bonuses, or have it gang up. Look for these options in the game setup. I know for certain you can give the AI bonuses and make it AI vs Humans. I think there might be another couple there.
A cheating AI just covers up poor AI. So what if it cheats? In CCRA I knew exactly how the AI cheated and I could easily beat it.

[Courageous]

"IMO cheating AI as a standard AI in the game is just a product of laziness of programmers."
---
It's much easier to write an AI when that AI has access to perfect information, but when it does not have such access, it is FAR more difficult, and while, I suppose, you might be able to, with a gread deal of work, design an AI which is "artificially not stupid" for the purposes of a GAME, to be able to do this kind of stuff reliably even with real world military computers is actually quite difficult and quite beyond the state of computing hardware today.

One of the reasons that this is the case is that when human beings don't have access to information, they use INTUITION, which is a way of saying that they have an intricate web of associations to a VAST library of past experiences of like-circumstances.

Meanwhile, your friend the AI opponent is most decidedly NOT a practiced player of MOO, CIV, TOAW, et al. This poor AI is looking at the problem the first time; worse, the game designer, when he designs the thing, often has no idea what some of the sneakier strategies might be.

What I'm trying to say here is that sweeping this all under the rug of "lazy programmers" can only be spoken by someone with no knowledge of AI programming at all.

C//

[Daynarr]

Gee Courageous, is it me, or you usually flame people like that. If you read my post more carefully you will notice that these 'lazy programmers' are not in MM since their STANDARD AI does not cheat. Also MM have SE3 AI that does not cheat and was quite formidable opponent, so in short - it can be done.
The game in question is RA2, which is 4th game in the series and should have advanced no-cheating AI (these guys had lots of time and HUGE feedback from fans to do it right).
But no, just and improved cheating AI that knows all the info in game, not to mention that they ALWAYS gang up on human player (would someone please explain to me what is the point in building gap generators in single-player game if the AI knows your location and strength anyway). That AI does display some advanced tactics on higher levels, but why cheating then. So many games in that genre had no cheating AI that was excellent opponent (Total Annihilation, Age of Empires 1 and 2 etc.). They made a breakthrough with Dune2 and C&C, but every game onward was just a perfect example of get-more-money-with-almost-the-same-thing attitude.
If decent AI can be done, and they don't do it, what are they?
BTW, I am well aware what pressure is done on developers to get their products done in designated time frame and I don't hold them to be 'lazy'. But one would expect them, in that case, to support their product with patches so they will fix and improve their product. Take MM as an example again.
Oh yeah, and leave my programming skills alone.

[jowe01]

For my part, I would like to be able to determine the ways in which the AI can cheat. A headstart in resources, racial points, planets, etc. ? Yes, I give that already to the AIs, however, it is me who decides. A better use of all available information (in a way humans could not use it)? Yes, yes, yes, that should be exploited. Let the AI e.g. simulate EVERY major battle before committing its forces. However, the simulation should be based on known/"guessed" designs because giving the AI information which it cannot have is a kind of cheating which I do not like (however, the AI could spend more intelligence points on knowing designs for example).

Nevertheless, though I am also no programmer, I think there is still ample space for AI improvement. Target evaluation (what do I attack, when do I abort my campaign, etc...)should be possible to do. Maybe some behaviour must be "hardcoded" into the AI (with some stochastic element) until a better solution is available.

[Courageous]

You can consider it a flame or a learning experience, the choice is yours. I'd prefer the latter, frankly. I have a long term career working in the field of planning, scheduling, and simulation. This stuff is HARD, particularly if the AIs are deprived of information. One should not sweep programmers under the rug of being "lazy" if they put cheats into their game A.I. It's simply not correct.

I should like to point out in passing that you'd be less subject to being "flamed" if you were less free and easy dealing out insults to people you don't know working in a problem domain that you haven't worked in.

C//

[Daynarr]

quote:

---

What I'm trying to say here is that sweeping this all under the rug of "lazy programmers" can only be spoken by someone with no knowledge of AI programming at all.

---

This is supposed to be my learning experience???

quote:

---

I should like to point out in passing that you'd be less subject to being "flamed" if you were less free and easy dealing out insults to people you don't know working in a problem domain that you haven't worked in.

---

So far you have been talking down on me and insulted ME (read the first quote to refresh your memory). I have NOT, on the other hand, insulted you back like most people would do in my situation. So it doesn't look like you are the right person to tell me NOT to insult other people. I didn't insutlted YOU to justify such a reaction, and if you really wanted to 'teach' me something, you would do it in more civilized manner. This way it only looks like you were using me to lay off some of your frustrations and I don't like it.

quote:

---

IMO cheating AI as a standard AI in the game is just a product of laziness of programmers.

---

True. It may have sounded like an insult, but then again, as you said, it could be a learning experience too.

quote:

---

One should not sweep programmers under the rug of being "lazy" if they put cheats into their game A.I. It's simply not correct.

---

First of all, I am entitled on my own opinion. If you are not sharing that opinion, you can make an argument using some facts. I didn't see any arguments that I was wrong and 'simply not correct' won't do. I also didn't insult ALL the programmers, or even all programmers who work on AI development for that matter. Also, for your knowledge, I am certainly not the only one with that opinion too. Read other forums and Posts, also read some reviews and previews. Even some journalists were using exactly the same expression on that matter. You will have to do find MUCH better reason to justify your reaction.

You should know that I am not some teenager who knows nothing about the things he talks about. I will NOT be flashing all my knowledge on programming or computers in general like you did but try, for the Last time, to hear this out. I do know that it is HARD to do it. But also you should know that when somebody makes some product that requires something, one should put an effort to finish it right.
And gaming industry requires good AI simply because customers can't always play multiplayer, and have to use it to get some entertainment. HARD is not an argument. Argument is that is has to be done. Entire teams of programmers are assigned to work on programming good AI. So there is NO EXCUSE when some company decides to put an effort on flashy graphics and ignores the development on AI. They have right to do it though, but I have right to call them for what they are (and I am been nice here), weather you like it or not.
Also Last argument on this matter. SE4 is most likely the most complex strategic game on market. 2 programmers have done it. And their AI doesn't cheat.

If you have any valid argument on this, I have open ears and I am always ready to learn something new. But if you plan on insulting me again, skip it (I certainly will). I would prefer first one, since you claim that you work in that area. This post is about cheating AI anyway and hearing something more about it is always welcome.

[Courageous]

One of the reasons it can be very difficult to design an AI that doesn't at least cheat with information is that human beings have intuition when computer programs do not. In other words, they have a vast array of associations to past experience which allow them to relate similar experiences to the new ones. While the various programmers involved with the design of a game may have some ideas of what the strategies ought to be, with complex games there will often be many oversights -- local maxima and minima in the game space if you will -- which will only become clear as the game is played by many human beings with different optimization strategies. Cheating A.I.s are not an issue of programmer laziness: rather, they are a recognition that the state of the art of the understanding of intelligence itself is really only in its infancy and that the capabilities of computer hardware per se are still orders of magnitude too slow in order to affect the solutions which even understood AI approaches require.

Referring to programmers who use cheating A.I. as "lazy" is not only inaccurate but also fails to recognize that in some situations it can be a very good design choice (although, of course, its best to keep the cheats hidden from the players).

Take for example a human opponent. A human opponent might *guess* that his other human opponent would be likely to exhibit a certain pattern of behavior. The human would use past experience with similar context as a justification for reasoning that certain behaviors in certain contexts are likely. The job of implementing something even vaguely like this in a computer game is simply ENORMOUS and might well be beyond the accessible cpu power of the target machine in question. A perfectly valid alternative for the implementing programmer would be to randomly on some occasions give the computer opponent information about the human opponent that it otherwise wouldn't have. This would be a "simulated guess". It is also cheating.

It's not at all lazy. If anything, I'd call it clever.

C//