Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: obermeister

PBEM seems a much more practical way to play.  Otherwise, when Commonwealth takes a naval, everyone can take a 30 minute break. 

What would be cool, and I don't know if this will be allowed, if it's possible to switch between PBEM and netplay mode sometimes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gurggulk

I think it's a huge step forward in programing an AI for MWiF. A step that brings WiF into the 21st century of computer gaming. A beginning step.

Its quite a challenge that Shannon V. OKeets, is undertaking to create an AI for this work of art. I fully support his mission in tackling this endeavor.

Anyone expecting perfection from the AI, at release is not a realist. Look at the errata and changes to WiF over the years. Not to mention the "house rules" sprung up around the game for a myriad of reasons. Look at the Forum posts. So much input and love for a game.

Love for a game? Think that is crazy? I don't, cuz its not just the game, its the people you have played with, will play with. Including the AI. I'm happy to see the birth of an AI that will grow and adapt as long as we are here to feed it, nurture it and punish it, as you punish you're friends across the table. The learning curve we have come to know was through playing. Playing to win.

It is through the AI we will see growth. Growth will bring new players and greater exposure. The new player looking for depth, in a WWII wargame. Not just a "rush" to win game. Patience is rewarded as is audacity. Long range planning and muti-faceted operations spanning a World in Flames, is not just a metaphor. Economic planning along strategic goals, will not be found in just any game on the market.

Anyone who has played the game knows the rollercoaster ride of emotions that fill a room of friends. Moments when time stops and all release at once in joy and despair. Those highlights are enduring and replayable because of the uncertainty. What could'a happened but the turn ended. What would'a happened but the weather changed. What should'a happened but the dice turned cold as death.

Will the AI make me feel the way and room of gamers makes me feel?

Probably not in the same way that you feel shaking dice in sweaty/shaky hands. Getting up to stretch after the 1st impluse of Barbarrosa. Counting up US entry again and again realizing you can Gear up for war. Wacthing as the convoy line to the UK is shattered under U-boat attacks. Knowing you just lost the pacific as Japan, and its time to defend the home islands.
But most important for me, The AI can't surrender from a hopeless position. It won't negotiate a re-play of a past turn. It won't get in my face after a weekend of playing, smelling of cigars, beer, unwashed socks and pizza breath to congratulate me for a game well played. Knowing we will get back together in a week to start all over again.
In the end, it just gets turned off.

Yes i want and look forward to an AI. But... its more important to realize the AI is a tool to play an elegant system. A system recreating the historical event of WWII. Air, Sea, Land, Economics, Politcal, Logistics. A means of growth from this forum to the outside world. Yes, that scary world out there that plays games but have not really played this game.

When the flame begins and the heat is rising, i really want a human being to share my gaming time with.
The AI can be a wonderful opponent, somedays. Un caring, untiring, speechless.
But give me that cussing SOB that makes me work my ass off and meet the challenge.

quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames

Steve

In the interest of maximizing its overall strength of its play, I am curious; while the AIO is being tested, are you going to assign strategic approaches to the various betatesters, to supply a wider range of tests to the effectiveness of the AI? It seems that adopting planned divergence in testing such as this would be helpful, though you probably have already considered this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greywolf

About the netplay, could it be possible for player of the same side to take over command of an absent player ?

Lets say we start the game with 6 players. Sessions end, game saved. Next Session, Italy/Japan player dont show up... can we start the game with the German player commanding all the Axis forces and decision ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

A couple of comments here:

1 - MWIF should make naval moves much easier (less time consuming), assuming the player knows what he wants to do. The units are easier to access (compared to large stacks in over-the-board games) and it is easier to see all the other units at sea (even when those are large stacks). The naval review details and summary forms were designed specifically for that purpose. Not to say that all the complexities of performing the Commonwealth naval moves go away, but they should be mitigated significantly.

2 - The non-phasing player could very well need to make a decision about naval interception. So, the Axis player needs to be available during those "30 minutes", just in case.

3 - I expect PBEM games to be able to transition to NetPlay and back again later. But games that start as NetPlay will not have that option. One consideration is that PBEM is only for two players while NetaPlay can have up to 6 players (3 per side).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Titi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

A couple of comments here:

1 - MWIF should make naval moves much easier (less time consuming), assuming the player knows what he wants to do. The units are easier to access (compared to large stacks in over-the-board games) and it is easier to see all the other units at sea (even when those are large stacks). The naval review details and summary forms were designed specifically for that purpose. Not to say that all the complexities of performing the Commonwealth naval moves go away, but they should be mitigated significantly.

2 - The non-phasing player could very well need to make a decision about naval interception. So, the Axis player needs to be available during those "30 minutes", just in case.

3 - I expect PBEM games to be able to transition to NetPlay and back again later. But games that start as NetPlay will not have that option. One consideration is that PBEM is only for two players while NetaPlay can have up to 6 players (3 per side).

First about 2) Only one player per side need sometime to be involved in interception, could always buzz or take the decision for an ally in predetermined portion of the sequence of play and on predetermined theater.



The only part missing for a complete integration of netplay and PBEM in a whole multiplayer unique option is to have PBEM for more than 2 players.

It would be great to have this option as a 2 players PBEM could become a 3 players game by intoducing a new player. Same for a three players becoming a four players game. Same for a 4 becoming a 3 ...

It would be even greater if PBEM & Netplay allow the option of spectator watching the game. Best way to interest and recrut future new players

In fact i think that multiplayer (Netplay or PBEM) must been as near as possible to what can happen to a real WiF game.
To be honest i had a distant experience with WiF (Version 4 of the rules and only two players) but i had much more with Empire in Arms and Europa Universalis (what a rule nightmare ).
In my experience the game must be very flexible to go to the end :
- allow a player to be added during a game, to resign, to change.
- allow player to be on leave for one day or two : leaving his country to another player or being frozen and playing alone at the start of next session with others players having a veto for any move that could be a problem in the timewrap.
- allow player to take a short break to drink a beer, listen to music, chat, smoke, make a phone, watch a movie ... in a time when not involved. If presence needed, that player is quickly called back.

That will cover computer problems, connection problems, not at home problems, firewall problems, etc that can hinder a multiplayer game.

Last chrome for a multiplayer game would be the option of doing a draft before the actual game. Planning the D-Day or Barbarossa before the time to play it to speed the game when the real time come. Of course the option to stop or edit it must remain.

You spend a lot of time to translate WiF to CWiF. Just take the time to adapt the interface to humans that will play it over a very long time and have a real and social life to interfere with CWiF

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansHafen

I think Steve needs to focus almost exclusively on the AI from now on. If this product won't work at all without a workable AI, as many have said in the "When" post responses to my suggestion, then that is the priority. I may be wrong in my understanding, but I think Steve has said that the AI has yet to make any decision in game. (Correct me if I am wrong). If this is so, massive work is still needed in this area. Four months doesn't seem to be long enough to get that done. And he is still needing to spend time on other things listed in his task list. It seems to me that the AI is going to be the most challenging aspect of this entire project, correct? Won't this take the longest to complete and test?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
5 - English text on how each decision will be made by the AIO (94 typed pages) are 80% done

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansHafen

How does the AI decide to stack units? Will it stack two big infantry units in one hex with a division also and then leave one division alone in the next hex? Will it divide it up to one infantry and one division each? Can you program this type of decision making?

How do you program the AI to consider and prepare for double moves? Offensive chits? Para drop possibilities? SRing?

Can the AI discern where the enemy Armor is and move AT divs etc to that sector? For example, if the German puts all his armor in AG South, can the AI see that and move AT assets down there? Or will it leave them where they are and not be able to respond to that type of tactic?

Will the AI garrison non-threatened areas deep in the home country when those troops are needed at the front?

How will the AI react to building strategies of its opponents? Can it?

We the AI be able to see and respond to a massive air buildup in England?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
The AIO is not a blank sheet of paper. I have put well over 1000 hours into it so far.

1 - The laguage specification (LAIO = Language for an Artifical Intelligence Opponent) is done
2 - Sample scripts written in LAIO are done
3 - Defined points within the sequence of play where the AIO needs to make a decision are all identified
4 - AIO modules written in Pascal to branch to the script for making the necessary decision at each decision point are done
5 - English text on how each decision will be made by the AIO (94 typed pages) are 80% done
6 - Strategic plans for each of the 8 major powers (over 200 pages) are 90% done

If I could turn over all the other tasks required to complete MWIF to someone else right now, I would happily do so. The only task I would not give up (though I willingly share the work) is the AIO. Coding the AIO has been my primary motivation since day one on this project, and that has never changed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greywolf

The AI from the others matrixgames (since SPWAW wich have a worst AI than SP-WWII) and notably the strategical ones you quoted was one of the reason why I was so reserved about MWiF.

Then I read the AI Thread and it was an eyes-opener. I really, really, like the way Steve is approching this thing and I really think it could work. I dont think it will play as good as a human but , heck, even the biggest computer cannot play chess strategically as good as human. They can compute extremely large amount of data but they need a human when the situation contain no logical or statistical advantage so they cannot make a choice. Look at one of the game of Kasparov against Deep Blue (I think), the situation was clearly at the human advantage building on with a long term strategy who was obvious to even a beginer but the computer wasn't able to judge the situation strategically and ressort to useless moves as it doesnt see the danger building until too late.

I think Steve job is a first step and very important one and the calculation power and multi-cpu of modern PC could work really well with what he planned. Funny how this remember me of Amiga computer of my youngs that works with dedicated CPU, one for graphic, one for music...

I would really love to be able to have an insighter on how is this thing going to work.

Steve, did you run test just with the LAIO ( without incorporating maps and counter data ) on the way the different AI sub-commander coordinate ? I would really like to see some debug log of the computer decision process.

The good thing is that, if MWiF AI is satisfying it will be a basis on wich build other AIO for other games, so every effort put into it is more than worthwile in the long term.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rmdesantis

Given the need for a good AI for the success of the game, and given the liklihood that any AI will make mistakes and require correction - would it be possible to have the opportunity to 'make corrections' in mid-game? That is, if the AI does something stupid that makes it too easy to beat it, that there is a way to pause the game, manually change the locations of the AI's pieces, and then continue? I don't know that it would be feasible to undo attacks or allocation of resources, but a simple correction of unit locations might be enough to keep the game playable.

Is this even a possibility?

quote:

ORIGINAL: rmdesantis

Given the need for a good AI for the success of the game, and given the liklihood that any AI will make mistakes and require correction - would it be possible to have the opportunity to 'make corrections' in mid-game? That is, if the AI does something stupid that makes it too easy to beat it, that there is a way to pause the game, manually change the locations of the AI's pieces, and then continue? I don't know that it would be feasible to undo attacks or allocation of resources, but a simple correction of unit locations might be enough to keep the game playable.

Is this even a possibility?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greywolf

Also I think that if you move/change the AI piece, the AiO will have a hard time starting from the new position mid-game... or can it adjust to the moving of just a few piece to a new position ?