Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
I'd like to give a little more input of why I don't mind the ai having advantages I don't have or as some call them "cheats". When you play a human individual who is of lesser experience than you are you can "teach" them to improve their game. This is something the player cannot do with a computer ai other than at least "options" to give it some distinct advantages. Most often it is in numbers of units, but, it is rarely Ever improved gameplay (slitherine uses a feature where the ai doesn't actually do anything for a certain amount of turns per difficulty level, I don't really consider this improved gameplay) whereas another human player usually can and will improve. Also since the majority of computer games sold are for the "solo" play (at least by all the polls I've seen), there definitely needs to be things that can at least improve the "challenge" of the game even for those that play hardcore highest difficulty from the start.

I've just never understood this philosophy of not adding "options" to increase difficulty beyond the norm. Why is it so hard to have something in the options that the player can adjust to make any game extremely challenging to them on an individual basis? Why is it so hard to add an option to increase the offense/defense stats of the ai units in % increments?? I've always thought a slider from 10% to 100% increase to offense/defense (one for each) stats would be perfect for computer wargames. Die roll modifier options as well. Maybe I'm thinking too much in board wargame play, but, it certainly was easy to do when giving a lesser experienced player some advantages when I played them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

I'd like to give a little more input of why I don't mind the ai having advantages I don't have or as some call them "cheats". When you play a human individual who is of lesser experience than you are you can "teach" them to improve their game. This is something the player cannot do with a computer ai other than at least "options" to give it some distinct advantages. Most often it is in numbers of units, but, it is rarely Ever improved gameplay (slitherine uses a feature where the ai doesn't actually do anything for a certain amount of turns per difficulty level, I don't really consider this improved gameplay) whereas another human player usually can and will improve. Also since the majority of computer games sold are for the "solo" play (at least by all the polls I've seen), there definitely needs to be things that can at least improve the "challenge" of the game even for those that play hardcore highest difficulty from the start.

I've just never understood this philosophy of not adding "options" to increase difficulty beyond the norm. Why is it so hard to have something in the options that the player can adjust to make any game extremely challenging to them on an individual basis? Why is it so hard to add an option to increase the offense/defense stats of the ai units in % increments?? I've always thought a slider from 10% to 100% increase to offense/defense (one for each) stats would be perfect for computer wargames. Die roll modifier options as well. Maybe I'm thinking too much in board wargame play, but, it certainly was easy to do when giving a lesser experienced player some advantages when I played them.

[* having it make decisions in a reasonable amount of time]
[* having it play at less than full capability but still intelligently]
[* accomplishing it on a budget (both time and money)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lothos

Shannon I sent you a PM and email please drop me a line via IM or email about AI stuff.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DerekP

If people seriously think the AI can be challenging for the average / superior player they will be kidding themselves.

The biggest problem in all startegy games is that the players "cheat". Not by breaking the rules (although some will do that) but by exploiting the rules. If an AI is programmed to execute a multiple choice type attack (if conquer France then choose Spain, Britain or Balkans depending on certain factors) then the players will know this and plan accordingly or even dupe the AI into choosing a favourable course of action for the player by artificially strengthening or weakening fronts.

Similarly any knowledge of the AI's rules (if Britain does this then Germany will probably do that) will lead to exploits

You can randomise the AI's actions to a degree but this leads into problems with sub-optimum (in the long run) strategies being chosen even if they shock the player in the short term.

The best we can hope for is an adequate AI for learners and a solid MP interface (and yes, Lothos is the best around and if he can help manage that for WiF then he will have excelled himself).

quote:

ORIGINAL: hakon
If Shannon is confident enough to not plan for AI advantages from the start, I dont mind, unless it becomes an Ego thing that prevents him from putting such features in when/if it is discoverd that the AI will not provide a real challenge to a competent human wif player.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees

Not everyone is an elite player.

I am a noob WiF player. By that, I mean I never played a human opponent. Therefore, any AI will be a challenge for me for some time. And if I decide to get my feet wet by playing a human, I will get spanked, and run back to playing the AI for emotional support.

Those customers who buy this computer game (and who do not own the boardgame) will need some kind of AI to play against while learning the mechanics of the game.

If they want to find opponents, or discuss strategy and become better players, then they can be directed (by info that is in the "about" section of MWiF) to these forums.

quote:

The number of possibilites are so much closer to infinity than a game of chess.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees

Not everyone is an elite player.

I am a noob WiF player. By that, I mean I never played a human opponent. Therefore, any AI will be a challenge for me for some time. And if I decide to get my feet wet by playing a human, I will get spanked, and run back to playing the AI for emotional support.

Those customers who buy this computer game (and who do not own the boardgame) will need some kind of AI to play against while learning the mechanics of the game.

If they want to find opponents, or discuss strategy and become better players, then they can be directed (by info that is in the "about" section of MWiF) to these forums.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

The number of possibilites are so much closer to infinity than a game of chess.

Mathematicians define two kinds of infinity: countable and uncountable. I believe both of these would be considered finite though.

quote:

ORIGINAL: idwilson66

I expect this is too late, but if you are still interested in having someone with a strong background in AI then let me know.

My Staff Page

quote:

As I see it an Ai is indespensible.

1) It helps tutor new players.
2) An advanced played can test various strategies while making assumptions on what a human player might do. Which could be relayed to Steve for MWiF 2 .
3) If there was no Ai then no Ai would ever get better. Only by building something do we see the flaws that can then be improved upon.
4) Network down and you need a quick fix of strategy gaming.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster

This link to research at the University of Tasmania (UTAS) on Multiple Classification Ripple Down Rules (MCRDR) may come in handy when designing the AI....

http://www.comp.utas.edu.au/users/bhkang/

I'll try to get Sprocc involved again too as his research work built on MCRDR. Something went wrong with him getting his NDA and then he was so busy with his PhD that he lost interest.

Cheers, Neilster

quote:

ORIGINAL: PanzerMike
Currently I'm playing HOI2/DD with the HIP mod (historical improvement project). It is one of the many mods for this game. A lot of competent people are tinkering with the game's graphics, but even more importantly with the AI. The AI can be adapted because Paradox in their wisdom decided that that AI files were accesible to anyone brave enough to try to improve on them. And improved they are. The AI is much better in the mod I'm playing than in vanilla. This keeps the game alive IMO.

Will WIF also have the possibility to alter the AI by changing AI scripts ? I hope so !

quote:

ORIGINAL: PanzerMike

I understand your priorities. It's just that I think by doing it the HOI/DD way, the longevity of a game ican be much improved upon. I reckon a game like
WIF will be played for a long time. I know I will

It would be great to see the game evolve after it's initial release because the community can improve it.

Ofcourse I don't know the progress you have made so far on the AI and how you designed it. I realize that changing the specs in a late stadium is a nono in a project (I'm a programmer myself). But if you have not yet decided upon the issue...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: PanzerMike

I understand your priorities. It's just that I think by doing it the HOI/DD way, the longevity of a game ican be much improved upon. I reckon a game like
WIF will be played for a long time. I know I will

It would be great to see the game evolve after it's initial release because the community can improve it.

Ofcourse I don't know the progress you have made so far on the AI and how you designed it. I realize that changing the specs in a late stadium is a nono in a project (I'm a programmer myself). But if you have not yet decided upon the issue...

The complexity of WIF is much higher than any other war game I know of - and I own and have played over 100 board games. The sequence of play alone is much more detailed than most games where you mostly just move units and then attack. The AIO will have hundreds of unique rules. Designing a system so they function well becomes more complicated if the requirement to make them available for modification by a player is added.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152
Speaking of WITP, two things that help.

Randomness

One thing that helps make the AI playable is the randomness of combat, sometimes very strange things happen like a (PT boat sinks a battleship). Yes strange things did and do happen in war, sure some people complain this is impossible and should never happen. Yet it's things like this that adds that uncertianty to war not found in other war games that helps keep it fresh. You would never find this level randomness in a board or John Tiller game.


Fog of War and Combat reports

Combat reports in WITP are notorious inaccurate, this seems to drive new players crazy (how come those 6 Zero's shot down all of my B-17's, this must be a bug). Sometimes it's weeks in the game before you really know if you sunk that battleship or carrier. Just like in real war, combat reports are almost always incorrect. This really adds that fog of war that's missing in all board war games and most computer war games.

These are two things that only can be done with a computer war game. To many ports of board games to computer make the mistake to only give the player the same old dice results for combat, and limit fog of war to what they can or can't see on the map. This makes a lot of combat in war games boring/dry and limits the buyers to only those true die hards of the board game.