Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: stretch

I'm trying to keep this in perspective. Writing an AI for WiF at all will be a gargantuan task. Making one that is any good may prove to be a Sisyphean task. Look at War in the Pacific for example. Apparently Gary Grigsby beat himself to death for months working on the AI for that game, yet it can be beat easily by a first timer learning the game as he goes along (i.e. me, winning the war far ahead of historical schedule).

I would argue that coding a competent AI for WiF will be a harder task than for WiTP.

Still, this AI in WiTP has provided me countless hours of fun playing the game solo. I know if I want more of a challenge, I need to play a human. The main purpose of the AI to me was providing an opponent against which I learned how to play at a basic level.

If an AI is written for WiF that accomplishes that task, given the complexity, I think it has to be considered a success.

quote:

For dumbing down the AIO, I still prefer just simply having it make poor choices about what unit types to build and where to deploy them.

quote:

Personally, I prefer to give the AI some production advantage (in the range of +10% to +50%), as this allows the tactical AI to be unchanged on all levels.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Glen Felzien

I must echo the dislike for needed cheats for AIOs. I understand why it is done but I find it disappointing. I want a challenge from a AIO that is playing better than I and not because it has greater resources at hand. That said, is it difficult to add such a feature for those that dont mind. Maybe a slider function that can be chosen at the campaign start: Less advantage - Even - Greater advantage. Somthing like that maybe?

Finally, will there be a hotseat function? With FoW, solitaire games would be better than table top solitaire.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stretch

Steve,

I wanted to point out that my reservations about an AI for WiF ever being any good is not a critique of your ability (or those who help). I (we all) deeply appreciate your hard work and I wanted to make sure I wasn't misunderstood.

I just don't want it to hang up development, which it easily could. I think in order to get a really good AI we'd need to convert Froonp's brain into a computer program. (a-la Dr. Daystrom on Star Trek TOS, Ep 53, "the ultimate computer".. and no I’m not an uber geek I had to look that up) .

quote:

There is a ton of work to do - but I enjoy doing it. I want to see some money someday too.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Glen Felzien

quote:

There is a ton of work to do - but I enjoy doing it. I want to see some money someday too.

LOL too true! One of the reasons I have great hope for this project is because you are a WiF player and understand the infinate complexity of the strategy that this game system allows. Because of the massively large number of possiblities, the AIO can indeed be a bottomless pit. I suspect you have already accounted for this but a cut off to AOI development has to be made after which, and depending on Matrix's level of continued post release support, the AIO could be patched (read enhanced) indefinately.

The bottom line is that the shipped AIO has to be at a level of competancy that you are comfortable with. I suspect anything less than that would result in you being (very) disappointed with the decision to release.

quote:

Of all the features, only the AIO won't be as complete as I can make it -and that is in deference to the obvious pressures on me to release the product ASAP (my wife is on my case about this every day on all of your behalf).

quote:

This applies to your concern, in that I have been working on the AIO since before Matrix officially hired me. I now fit it in when I eat breakfast and lunch, during commercials, while driving, and when walking down a fairway. It is an item on my task list but it will be the last item completed before delivery. Eventually I will reach the point that a good friend of mine refers to as "when in doubt, ship it out." Perhaps a bit too cynical, but it emphasizes the fact that I am no McClellan.

quote:

I think in order to get a really good AI we'd need to convert Froonp's brain into a computer program. (a-la Dr. Daystrom on Star Trek TOS, Ep 53, "the ultimate computer".. and no I’m not an uber geek I had to look that up) .

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
You began working on the AIO before being hired by Matrixgames ?
Can I ask you why ? For fun ? Because of ideas you had that might fit in MWiF ?
I just ask for the sake of interest on how you came to MWiF.

Cheers !
Patrice

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

Personally, I prefer to give the AI some production advantage (in the range of +10% to +50%), as this allows the tactical AI to be unchanged on all levels.

Arrrgghhhh, Steve, the cross, the cross !!!!!!!

The devil is here again !!!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rexor

Any news on the AI?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
Is NetPlay different from PBEM?

As in: NetPlay = Real time, over the internet, playing, with "chat" boxes so you can call the opponent a cheating bastage to his face, and each player can see each piece as it is moved.

PBEM = Play by Email = Much slower paced, non-real time, where moves are sent as entire packaged bundles that need to be imported into your last save spot. Typically punctuated by "Oh, resend your last urn. We're out of sync again...".

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees

Thanks for the offer, sir. If the PBEM system is going to be similar to the conclusions and hopes reached on these forums, then I think I have a close enough grasp on that.

I had not seen the term "NetPlay" used often, though.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

1 - The problem I find in most AI design is that developers attempt to do the impossible and make an ai that "plays fairly". In their attempt to make a machine equal to a human many fail time and time again. A few like Meier, Mad Minute designers, Slitherine have moved away from this "must be fair and equal to a human" programming and created what I would think most game players want....a "challenging AI". Now, I'm one of those that doesn't care if the AI knows where my units are or if it gets experience or even die roll modifier advantages and these are things I've asked for time and time again some sliders or something where the individual player can modify the combat statistics in an options menu. It's one of the best things about the Combat Mission and Steel Panthers series where I can give the AI more units or myself less and also increase the experience levels of these units and add +1, +2 or +3 modifiers. I would like to see those options go one step futher with die roll modifiers as I believe the SSG games have.

2 - Having the ai run thru all these decision codes for politics and resource gathering, I think just makes it harder for the ai to play a good game. I've always said less means better when it comes to an AI. An old game "Empire Deluxe" certainly will show most anyone what an ai with less can do to a human player. There's plenty of settings/options in "Empire Deluxe" for anyone to reach that ultimate "challenge" that I would think they are looking for.

3 - Objectives are important and programming an AI to obtain and hold these are important, but, not to the point of banzai attacks just because there is one in the human players possession and going from a winning situation to a losing situation as the AI in the Combat Mission series does time and time again. The AI should definitely always do a victory check vs time left in the game. If it's ahead and there's very little time left there is no need to make advances to other objectives. It should go into a defensive or probing posture and force the human player to advance and take those banzai losses instead. ;)

4 - Trying to make the game TOO historically accurate. Of course it shouldn't have modern day like tanks, but, it also needs to play against what the human player does vs what was done historically. It needs to "react to the situation" and not to what the history books says it should do. This comes to the question of "must" there be a D-Day invasion timed specifically to what happened realistically? To me if you make a game designed for a history lesson the game loses that "whatif" ability of change. If the AI always does this or that every single game, the human player is going to "react" to it every single game. Much like MTW's Horde invasion, we all know exactly the when and where it's going to happen and setup for it. Therefore there needs to be variables to given situations that change from game to game, but, not so much so that it is beyond believeablity. Probably easier said than done huh? lol

5 -Bottom line is the AI's clear objective in every game should be to WIN, not just delay or harass the human player, but, actually play to WIN and that's one of the major issues with craptastic AI's today. They are merely programmed too much as a road block instead of with the mindset of WINNING!.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

The problem I find in most AI design is that developers attempt to do the impossible and make an ai that "plays fairly". In their attempt to make a machine equal to a human many fail time and time again. A few like Meier, Mad Minute designers, Slitherine have moved away from this "must be fair and equal to a human" programming and created what I would think most game players want....a "challenging AI". Now, I'm one of those that doesn't care if the AI knows where my units are or if it gets experience or even die roll modifier advantages and these are things I've asked for time and time again some sliders or something where the individual player can modify the combat statistics in an options menu. It's one of the best things about the Combat Mission and Steel Panthers series where I can give the AI more units or myself less and also increase the experience levels of these units and add +1, +2 or +3 modifiers. I would like to see those options go one step futher with die roll modifiers as I believe the SSG games have.

Having the ai run thru all these decision codes for politics and resource gathering, I think just makes it harder for the ai to play a good game. I've always said less means better when it comes to an AI. An old game "Empire Deluxe" certainly will show most anyone what an ai with less can do to a human player. There's plenty of settings/options in "Empire Deluxe" for anyone to reach that ultimate "challenge" that I would think they are looking for.

Objectives are important and programming an AI to obtain and hold these are important, but, not to the point of banzai attacks just because there is one in the human players possession and going from a winning situation to a losing situation as the AI in the Combat Mission series does time and time again. The AI should definitely always do a victory check vs time left in the game. If it's ahead and there's very little time left there is no need to make advances to other objectives. It should go into a defensive or probing posture and force the human player to advance and take those banzai losses instead. ;)

Trying to make the game TOO historically accurate. Of course it shouldn't have modern day like tanks, but, it also needs to play against what the human player does vs what was done historically. It needs to "react to the situation" and not to what the history books says it should do. This comes to the question of "must" there be a D-Day invasion timed specifically to what happened realistically? To me if you make a game designed for a history lesson the game loses that "whatif" ability of change. If the AI always does this or that every single game, the human player is going to "react" to it every single game. Much like MTW's Horde invasion, we all know exactly the when and where it's going to happen and setup for it. Therefore there needs to be variables to given situations that change from game to game, but, not so much so that it is beyond believeablity. Probably easier said than done huh? lol

Bottom line is the AI's clear objective in every game should be to WIN, not just delay or harass the human player, but, actually play to WIN and that's one of the major issues with craptastic AI's today. They are merely programmed too much as a road block instead of with the mindset of WINNING!.

quote:

With regard to your concerns that the AI might be swamped by complexity, a look at the posts of composer99 and Froonp on the grand strategy threads might be worthwhile.