An AI question for a Dev

licker · #1 November 5th, 2003, 12:15 AM

Since I've been talking about this so much I'd like to know if its even remotely feasable for you to do.

I'm talking about externalizing AI inputs and responses into text editable tables. This would allow Users to make tweeks and changes to try and build a better mousetrap...

MoO3 did this extensively (if you have any knowledge of MoO3 that is). I think SEIV also allows for some form of this, and even SMAC and probably the CIVs let certain 'traits' be modified in text files, though I'm not sure how much impact they had on the AI.

If you've been following the long AI thread you probably know better what I'm talking about, I've babbled about it in other threads as well

DominionsFan · #2 November 5th, 2003, 10:36 AM

licker you think that the devs will care about the AI at all? I tend to think, that they are totally ignoring this topic.

Kristoffer O · #3 November 5th, 2003, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by licker:
Since I've been talking about this so much I'd like to know if its even remotely feasable for you to do.

I'm talking about externalizing AI inputs and responses into text editable tables. This would allow Users to make tweeks and changes to try and build a better mousetrap...

MoO3 did this extensively (if you have any knowledge of MoO3 that is). I think SEIV also allows for some form of this, and even SMAC and probably the CIVs let certain 'traits' be modified in text files, though I'm not sure how much impact they had on the AI.

If you've been following the long AI thread you probably know better what I'm talking about, I've babbled about it in other threads as well

I'm not sure. I'm not against externalization per se, but I'm not sure what can easily be externalized. If externalization was possible we would get much less demands on the AI. People could then tinker at home. It would probably be for the best, but as I said I'm not sure what and how this would work.

von_Schmidt · #4 November 5th, 2003, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DominionsFAN:
licker you think that the devs will care about the AI at all? I tend to think, that they are totally ignoring this topic.

How about you stop your incessant complaining about that?

One of the Devs has stated they are reading the threads and *are* looking for specific complaints and specific suggestions about how to improve the AI. So it is actually in their mind.

If you want to get an improved AI, you might want to offer some constructive insights instead of *demanding* replies.

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

von Schmidt

Alneyan · #5 November 5th, 2003, 01:46 PM

And you should keep in mind programming an efficient AI is said to be hard (and annoying as well, but I never tried my hand at doing such a thing) I don't believe there are ten people who only deal with the AI at Illwinter either. (It would be more like one who does other things as well) And a developer asked for input on the AI thread, about the problem of forts at the very least. (It is only my opinion, but I would also believe the full game is needed to have a clearer view of the AI)

To the topic, allowing people to tweak the behaviour of the AI (like in SEIV, where you can change the build priorities, reseach priorities, designs used by the AI among other things) would be nice, if it can be done without too much problem with quite comprehensible files. (When you do know how to tinker with AIs that is) That would also depend on who would like to tweak AIs. (and maybe who is able to do so as well.

)

von_Schmidt · #6 November 5th, 2003, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Zerger:

quote:
Originally posted by von_Schmidt:

quote:
Originally posted by DominionsFAN:
licker you think that the devs will care about the AI at all? I tend to think, that they are totally ignoring this topic.

How about you stop your incessant complaining about that?

One of the Devs has stated they are reading the threads and *are* looking for specific complaints and specific suggestions about how to improve the AI. So it is actually in their mind.

If you want to get an improved AI, you might want to offer some constructive insights instead of *demanding* replies.

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

von Schmidt
Actually there are lot of suggestions about the AI, and those suggestions ARE all good. All of those are about valid AI problems.
I can understand if DFan is pissed, the devs made like 1 comment in that huge thread.

What annoys me about DFan is:

1. His attitude: as if he has already bought and played the game, but there is a show-stopping bug which is completely ignored by the devs. Which is not the case.

2. Attitude2: as if the devs have a contractual obligation to actually react to each suggestion with indepth analysis.
Give them some time to think and collect several ideas!

3. Posting habits: in how many threads has he now reiterated that the devs seem to ignore the AI?

4. Tone: that of a child demanding attention RIGHT NOW.

I do agree that the AI issues and suggestions seem to be quite valid. But cut the devs some slack; that's all I'm saying.
Especially since they seem quite reachable, open to suggestions and willing to make changes - defintely compared to 95% of the other game devs/companies out there.

Cheers,

von Schmidt

Particle · #7 November 5th, 2003, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by von_Schmidt:
I do agree that the AI issues and suggestions seem to be quite valid. But cut the devs some slack; that's all I'm saying.

Indeed. I agree with this.

licker · #8 November 5th, 2003, 05:00 PM

Children children...

Thanks for the post Kris, I hope that you are able to figure out some way to externalize some parameters without having to do too much new work.

Anyway, the seed has now been planted, and maybe taken root in your mind, so for the next project perhaps you'll look in this direction. I think its a good direction to move in as it allows you to pull in the resources of the fan base for getting better settings. And the best thing is that at some point you can use different settings to actually make Easy, Normal, Difficult, Impossible, actually have more differences than just more or fewer resources for the computer players

Gandalf Parker · #9 November 5th, 2003, 06:48 PM

I have taken a hand in externalizing AI. In a MUD game (which is a freely available option Id highly recomend to anyone interested) but the particulars would be much the same. I love games that provide it and do believe it would do much toward increasing the lifespan of this game. Im not sure how likely it would be to add it though.

The first thing needed would be recognizable tags for everything the AI would "see" and do. If those are not already in the game (which I dont know) then there would be ALOT of programming to put them in. If we pick one of the AI suggestions we could discuss it further as far as what info would have to be made avaiable, what actions would have to be made available, etc.

licker · #10 November 5th, 2003, 07:01 PM

Ok, lets pick 'army composition' as the element to externalize. Lets ignore commanders and summons for now, focus just on balances with recruitable units.

First lets assume that the AI has a composite picture of its current nation every turn, that would be tresury, income, upkeep, resources (gotta break this one up a bit to capital, forts, and other) and existing army composition.

Now the AI would have to have some default setting (this is the externalized part) that defines what ratio of different unit types it should strive for. This is further complicated by how many armies the AI will have, but lets just look at the national picture and worry about creating the armies later.

So you would have a weighted list of unit types (could be all units in the game, but that seems like overkill).

So to do this in a simple way...

Militia
LI
LI-ranged
MI
MI-ranged
HI
HI-ranged
Archers (short, long, comp, xbow)
LC
LC-ranged
HC
HC-ranged (does that even exist?)
Flyers (perhaps light and heavy? how many differnet flyers are there outside of caelum)

Aquatics would have a different list, but lets stick to the land for the time being.

So from the above list of units types a check is made to see if the nation even has the posibility to recruit the unit type, followd by the amount of available resources to spend on each unit type. Then some algorythem dependant on other settings (national preferences, AI personalities, counter needs, ...) is applied and the existing %s are modified to new values (or left unchanged as needed). Finally, units are ordered to fit the new %s.

That's how I'd probably approach army compostion anyway. Realize this is only part of the overall package, the location of the units recruitment and the recruitment of commanders would also have to be factored in somehow, but that should happen in another matrix I think, though the matricies should be tied together through the controling algorythem(s) that affect them.