An alternative use for the AI

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

An alternative use for the AI

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> An alternative use for the AI

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

An alternative use for the AI - 6/18/2009 9:56:31 AM

Greyshaft

Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14
Regardless, there will be an AI...and I hope it will be nothing more than a minimal tutorial strength AI.

I hope the AI is far better than tutorial strength.

An AI will be extremely useful when there are insufficient players for the full Global War and no-one wants to play (say) Russia.

An even better use for the AI is when three players take one side and they let the AI take the opposition. In that case there is no possible game-generated animosity between the players but instead there is a real opportunity to enjoy fighting a game for the Common Good... (until 1945 when another player gets too close to the last victory hex - that's when the gloves come off).

_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to Jagdtiger14)

Post #: 31

RE: An alternative use for the AI - 6/18/2009 10:16:39 AM

Subetai

Posts: 6
Joined: 9/18/2006
Status: offline

Yes, I need a descent AI. But as I understand it, one side is either all human played (even if only one person) or all AIO. True?

(in reply to Greyshaft)

Post #: 32

RE: Mode of Play - 6/18/2009 11:09:20 AM

undercovergeek

Posts: 1526
Joined: 11/21/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

quote:

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

quote:

ORIGINAL: JonBrave

Steve,

In your 1st June Update Report, you said

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

... This was motivated by a conversation with David Heath about how important the AI Opponent will be.
... I now agree with Dave: the AIO is crucial for sales.

That was 6 weeks before supposed release date. That's what "concerns" me. I would have thought that was figured long ago, I have been returning to the thread for years. Polls can be conducted well in advance if wanted.

I do realise my tone is critical. But I do not mean to offend.

What "Dave" said is totally true. You can see the effect of a dumb AI in the results of the launch of Empire Total War, in terms of prestige (future sales) and in terms of inmediate sales cut through the feedback of online forums. Even though they tried to patch it decently afterwards.

As for me, I will play AI, like (i believe) 95% - 99 of the possible buyers. Honestly I don't think people will ever (with some extremely rare exceptions) Solitaire.

Hotseat is a possibiity but considering how extended is internet and computers, it's most probably obsolete in benefit of Netplay.

PBEM is another very minoritary option, although I believe it is not totaly substitued by Netplay. It may still be useful.

So, for me would be AI+ ocasionally Netplay. For the general market, i would include a niche for those who still need PBEM. I would say the other options are totally outdated. For example: How many people you know who play chess against themselves?

i think steves survey was 60/40 so its not as big a majority as you may think - and a survey elsewhere puts PBEM above AI - beware the non-AIers are growing

Of course, my perception can be wrong. However, what I was meaning is that i don't think the results of the survey are quite valid, since (IMO) that's not what people really does when they buy the games.

Old wargamers (somehow I include myself) like those who can form the fan group of this game ( I include myself no doubt) and the base of this forum can have very different behaviour than the final buyers' majority. Anyway, I think many people may have not understood completely what solitaire game meant (although it was explained for those who took care to read it) like it almost happened to me, when I nearly confused it with AI .

I wonder how representative is the votes of a small number of hardened grognards in the final requirements that the game should have. It's not a matter of "treasoning" a product like WIF by depriving it from some of it's characteristics, but of adapting the gameplay to the modern systems. I mean, it would be like making square roots by hand, although you have a computer.

Of course, this is a forum, full of opinions and that is just mine.

apologies - i meant to quote praem who seems to think EVERYONE will be playing AI, whereas - and this isnt a rant for a no AI edition - i believe eventually the vast majority will hit netplay and PBEM - its what this game was made for and its the closest you can get to playing the board game, over a beer, with a friend, except its over the ether, with a beer, with a friend - a virtual reconstruction of the game.

as i did with witp after the tutorial - i will not touch the single player button, these games were made for play against humans

(in reply to Joseignacio)

Post #: 33

RE: Mode of Play - 6/18/2009 11:59:56 AM

Joseignacio

Posts: 2449
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline

No apologies needed.

Of course I prefer to play personally against a human player on the physical board, in the virtual board, and against an AI in this order, like most or all wargamers, but it's extremely difficult to find the coincidence in timetables the more players involved.

Right now we have been playing a WIF game (4 players) and we could only make our agendas meet once a month, although we played like 8-9 hours those few days. It means that, although the game was aborted by the surrender of the allies (the russian player was pretty new and didn't help enough), it took us about 1 or 2 years to make to 1942 or 1943 (don't remember exactly), because we couldn't play either in july/august and some other periods where people had holidays, ...

Also, we had to meet in a village about 50 km ( +/- 30 miles) from Madrid, with frequent traffic jams, which were a nuisance.

The PBEM or netplay would solve the problem of travelling in order to play, but netplay wouldn't solve the agenda problem (work & familiar responsabilities).

The PBEM could be valid as for the agenda problem only if the discipline of all was constant enough to keep a rythm in the send of turns. My only experience with this was (if I recall well) with the game Space Empires IV, and although the 4 of us were serious players, there was always a certain longer delay of one of them, which was uncomfortable. Also, after some time, the interest decayed and the game was abandoned. I think it's difficult to keep a long term interest with the PBEM, but maybe it's only my experience.

That's why it's invaluable to be able to play with the AI. That 90/95% of the times that my human opponents are not avaliable when I want to play I can play against the AI, which does not collide with the preference that, of course, I will give to play against humans.

< Message edited by Joseignacio -- 6/18/2009 12:53:19 PM >

(in reply to undercovergeek)

Post #: 34

RE: An alternative use for the AI - 6/18/2009 1:05:47 PM

pzgndr

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

i believe eventually the vast majority will hit netplay and PBEM - its what this game was made for and its the closest you can get to playing the board game, over a beer, with a friend, except its over the ether, with a beer, with a friend - a virtual reconstruction of the game.

This is what VASSAL and CyberBoard PBEM software was made for, specifically for players who only want to play games against other humans over the internet.

Computer games are different. Players buy and play computer games - rather than VASSAL and/or CyberBoard - specifically because computer games provide something the PBEM software does not. Specifically, a computer opponent, in addition to the PBEM and netplay capability. Matrix understands this, and markets computer games with AI computer opponents. Matrix appears to be doing quite well by recognizing this fact of life, despite those who believe otherwise.

quote:

i will not touch the single player button, these games were made for play against humans

Good for you! I and others probably will not touch the PBEM or netplay button. So what? Nobody should worry themselves about how other people want to play their games for fun as they see fit. Like Yogi Berra says, if people don't want to play [AI] [PBEM] [Netplay] [Solitaire], nobody's gonna stop 'em.

(in reply to Greyshaft)

Post #: 35

RE: An alternative use for the AI - 6/18/2009 2:15:38 PM

undercovergeek

Posts: 1526
Joined: 11/21/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

didnt you get all shouty for no reason!!!!!????

vassal is no good to me - i dont own the board game, i want to own the pc game and play against a human opponent - what software is out there to replicate this for me?

a good duplication of a board game with PBEM ability thats what.

(in reply to pzgndr)

Post #: 36

RE: An alternative use for the AI - 6/18/2009 2:24:20 PM

Mike Parker

Posts: 583
Joined: 12/30/2008
From: Houston TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Subetai

Yes, I need a descent AI. But as I understand it, one side is either all human played (even if only one person) or all AIO. True?

I believe this is a correct statement. An entire side CW - Axis - Comintern is all AI or All human. There is no individual countries controlled by the AI.. at least not until all but one country is conquored, but that is only a technical detail.

(in reply to Subetai)

Post #: 37

RE: An alternative use for the AI - 6/18/2009 2:28:32 PM

Gneisenau

Posts: 22
Joined: 7/17/2004
From: Virginia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

quote:

i believe eventually the vast majority will hit netplay and PBEM - its what this game was made for and its the closest you can get to playing the board game, over a beer, with a friend, except its over the ether, with a beer, with a friend - a virtual reconstruction of the game.

This is what VASSAL and CyberBoard PBEM software was made for, specifically for players who only want to play games against other humans over the internet.

Computer games are different. Players buy and play computer games - rather than VASSAL and/or CyberBoard - specifically because computer games provide something the PBEM software does not. Specifically, a computer opponent, in addition to the PBEM and netplay capability. Matrix understands this, and markets computer games with AI computer opponents. Matrix appears to be doing quite well by recognizing this fact of life, despite those who believe otherwise.

quote:

i will not touch the single player button, these games were made for play against humans

Good for you! I and others probably will not touch the PBEM or netplay button. So what? Nobody should worry themselves about how other people want to play their games for fun as they see fit. Like Yogi Berra says, if people don't want to play [AI] [PBEM] [Netplay] [Solitaire], nobody's gonna stop 'em.

I'm with ya Brother - 100% ditto

(in reply to pzgndr)

Post #: 38

RE: An alternative use for the AI - 6/18/2009 2:28:52 PM

micheljq

Posts: 791
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

This is what VASSAL and CyberBoard PBEM software was made for, specifically for players who only want to play games against other humans over the internet.

Computer games are different. Players buy and play computer games - rather than VASSAL and/or CyberBoard - specifically because computer games provide something the PBEM software does not. Specifically, a computer opponent, in addition to the PBEM and netplay capability. Matrix understands this, and markets computer games with AI computer opponents. Matrix appears to be doing quite well by recognizing this fact of life, despite those who believe otherwise.

In the first Survey, I did answer 0% to PBEM. Finally, and seeing that MWiF scheduled date was postponed. I began playing a PBEM game with Vassal. After 2 weeks, I like it a lot and I see a lot of advantages over a board game. You can do your moves even when your opponent is away, you don't mess the counters, it's actually easier to move them. I do not mean to stop playing on board, I will never do so. I also have a Global War campaign on board going on.

I think that PBEM with MWiF will simplify many things. As for me I do a lot of mistakes, sometimes doing more moves than allowed, forgetting some ressources (especially when playing CW), etc. MWiF, will provide a way to counter me from doing such mistakes an will make the production phase, reorg. with oil easier. At least it has the potential to do so.

If MWiF would be available now with only PBEM and NetPlay who is working right, and no AI. I would buy it right now, unless it's too costly. But, I understand that many members of the community wants an AI.

An issue I have with the AI is the time that can be spend on developping one, you could spend 2 months or could as well take 20 years developping one.

< Message edited by micheljq -- 6/18/2009 2:34:23 PM >

(in reply to pzgndr)

Post #: 39

RE: An alternative use for the AI - 6/18/2009 4:19:06 PM

Mike Parker

Posts: 583
Joined: 12/30/2008
From: Houston TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pzgndr
Computer games are different. Players buy and play computer games - rather than VASSAL and/or CyberBoard - specifically because computer games provide something the PBEM software does not. Specifically, a computer opponent, in addition to the PBEM and netplay capability. Matrix understands this, and markets computer games with AI computer opponents. Matrix appears to be doing quite well by recognizing this fact of life, despite those who believe otherwise.

While I am firmly on the side that wants an AIO and a decent one, I think there is alot more to the advantage of a computer game than just an AIO.

1. You can set up the game and leave it setup without hogging up your dining room table (or whatever) and the cat jumping up to take a look won't completly derail your Caucus' campaign!

2. You can take care of bookeeping automatically without any paper records

3. Niggling rule details/discrepancies/arguments are arbitrated by the computers implimentation.

4. (not germaine to MWIF but) Much more complex methods can be used for a variety of actions within the game can be used as the computer can crunch through the calculations for you. So things that mighthave been thought impossible on a board game can be done with ease on a computer game.

Somewhere in there is an AIO, for me its at the top or near the top, being able to set the game up virtually is actually the best feature to me of computer vis a vis board games.

(in reply to pzgndr)

Post #: 40

RE: An alternative use for the AI - 6/18/2009 4:30:37 PM

pzgndr

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

I think there is alot more to the advantage of a computer game than just an AIO.

I agree, and that's why I specifically mentioned the AI in addition to PBEM and netplay capability. They are ALL important. I support ALL of them. I would not presume to tell another player how he should play his game, nor try to deny another player features that are beneficially to all of us. And yet, there are others with an attitude about something who persist in trying to limit or restrict a computer game's development. It's a silly thing, and thankfully Matrix continues to plod forward committed to trying to satisy all gamers, regardless of whatever mode of play they choose.

(in reply to Greyshaft)

Post #: 41

RE: An alternative use for the AI - 6/18/2009 6:07:20 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14
Regardless, there will be an AI...and I hope it will be nothing more than a minimal tutorial strength AI.

I hope the AI is far better than tutorial strength.

An AI will be extremely useful when there are insufficient players for the full Global War and no-one wants to play (say) Russia.

An even better use for the AI is when three players take one side and they let the AI take the opposition. In that case there is no possible game-generated animosity between the players but instead there is a real opportunity to enjoy fighting a game for the Common Good... (until 1945 when another player gets too close to the last victory hex - that's when the gloves come off).

For the initial release, the AI Opponent will play one side against a single human player. That's all. I am also focusing on only 4 scenarios: Barbarossa, Guadalcanal, Fascist Tide, and Global War. The remaining 7 scenarios will be post release (at no additional cost).

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Greyshaft)

Post #: 42

RE: Mode of Play - 6/18/2009 8:06:10 PM

Anendrue

Posts: 817
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14
I hope it will be nothing more than a minimal tutorial strength AI.

The AI is going to be in the game so I don't know why you would want such a thing! I hope you realize a bad or minimal AI will hurt reviews and the potential customer base from expanding to new market segments. The more successful MWiF is the more likly we are to get expansions and additions to the game. Of course if you are a competition plant or just a negative type of individual we will just disregard your statement as one more for the trash can.

_____________________________

Integrity is what you do when nobody is watching.

(in reply to Jagdtiger14)

Post #: 43

RE: Mode of Play - 6/18/2009 11:13:42 PM

arehb

Posts: 7
Joined: 1/23/2009
Status: offline

Will the AI be updated after release, or based on scripts that can be edited? Wouldn't be very cool if you could discover holes in the AI strategies/tactics and use those over and over again.

It would be nice if one eventually could get complete control over what countries are played by AIs and what by players and mix them as one sees fit.

(in reply to Anendrue)

Post #: 44

RE: Mode of Play - 6/18/2009 11:59:39 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: arehb

Will the AI be updated after release, or based on scripts that can be edited? Wouldn't be very cool if you could discover holes in the AI strategies/tactics and use those over and over again.

It would be nice if one eventually could get complete control over what countries are played by AIs and what by players and mix them as one sees fit.

My contract with Matrix Games states that I will support MWIF for at least 18 months after its initial release.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to arehb)

Post #: 45

RE: Mode of Play - 6/19/2009 1:13:37 AM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

I really look forward to the Barbarossa AI. My very first computer wargame was such a let-down ... Atari's "Eastern Front", circa 1983. That AI always wins by continually increasing the strength of it's pieces. With an MWiF AI, it also won't be so hard to find someone to play the Russians in that scenario.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 46

RE: Mode of Play - 6/19/2009 3:25:57 PM

gridley

Posts: 126
Joined: 10/2/2006
From: Caledon
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: arehb

Will the AI be updated after release, or based on scripts that can be edited? Wouldn't be very cool if you could discover holes in the AI strategies/tactics and use those over and over again.

There will always be holes in any AI. It's up to you to make your own house rules not to exploit them.

< Message edited by gridley -- 6/19/2009 3:56:16 PM >

(in reply to arehb)

Post #: 47

RE: Mode of Play - 6/19/2009 11:03:41 PM

Jagdtiger14

Posts: 1686
Joined: 1/22/2008
From: Miami Beach
Status: offline

abj,

You dont know me, but there are a few here that know me personally...Steve Balk for one. I am an avid WiF player and am in no way a competitor plant. For the record I am a very optimistic guy. As for the AI...it all depends on what your meaning of "good AI" is...for me a fantastic AI is one that is tutorial strength...if Steve can pull that off, he is a hero. Demanding an AI better than that AND if those demands move the release date back, then I consider you a greedy f*#%. You are getting your AI...be happy...now dont make this an impossible release...let us play the game. If you want a more advanced AI, wait for the later add ons.
C

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14
I hope it will be nothing more than a minimal tutorial strength AI.

The AI is going to be in the game so I don't know why you would want such a thing! I hope you realize a bad or minimal AI will hurt reviews and the potential customer base from expanding to new market segments. The more successful MWiF is the more likly we are to get expansions and additions to the game. Of course if you are a competition plant or just a negative type of individual we will just disregard your statement as one more for the trash can.

_____________________________

Conflict with the unexpected: two qualities are indispensable; first, an intellect which, even in the midst of this obscurity, is not without some traces of inner light which lead to the truth; second, the courage to follow this faint light. KvC

(in reply to Anendrue)

Post #: 48

RE: Mode of Play - 6/19/2009 11:42:21 PM

pasternakski

Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14
As for the AI...it all depends on what your meaning of "good AI" is...for me a fantastic AI is one that is tutorial strength...if Steve can pull that off, he is a hero. Demanding an AI better than that AND if those demands move the release date back, then I consider you a greedy f*#%. You are getting your AI...be happy...now dont make this an impossible release...let us play the game. If you want a more advanced AI, wait for the later add ons.

Okay. So at least three-quarters of the potential customers for this game are greedy whatever-that-is.

See, those who play against the AI don't demand much. They never have, clear back to the old SSI days.

They buy because they want to play against the computer, not against people. That was what computer wargame companies promised to deliver clear back in the infancy of computer wargames. They have always accepted crap AI and computer cheating and don't care. They get by, like the same proportion of cardboard-and-paper gamers who devised (and devise) ways to play against themselves.

Nothing against hotseat, TCP/IP, PBEM. I play a lot of that, and it's fun.

It just isn't what the hobby promised. If you want a computer wargame business that caters exclusively, or even primarily, to the human-vs.-human crowd, you had better be prepared for low sales and eventual insolvency.

It ain't that way because I say it is, it's that way because that's how it is.

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to Jagdtiger14)

Post #: 49

RE: Mode of Play - 6/20/2009 1:33:19 AM

coregames

Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

They buy because they want to play against the computer, not against people. That was what computer wargame companies promised to deliver clear back in the infancy of computer wargames. They have always accepted crap AI and computer cheating and don't care. They get by, like the same proportion of cardboard-and-paper gamers who devised (and devise) ways to play against themselves.

I agree that MWiF needs a sufficient AI in order to succeed to the degree the franchise deserves to succeed. The issue seems to be what qualifies as sufficient. I look forward to playing against the initial release of MWiF, as do many of us I'm sure, with the idea that we can suggest improvements to the AIO. Since Steve is on board for 18 months after release, I believe MWiF will have a surprisingly strong AIO within that timeframe. This is not to say it will consistently give a strong experienced player a run for his or her money in a global war scenario.

Remember that WiF has a bidding mechanic which would prove helpful in providing the computer with a handicap if the player's strength merits it, and this does not require affecting dice rolls, providing extra production, or changing the unit characteristics in any way. This is not cheating, as humans often use bidding to determine which country each player gets to control, which we have found does add a balancing factor, especially when introducing a new player to the game.

Still, for the maximum challenge in a long scenario, I do believe we will discover that actual strong players are the only option. If the Japanese can't program a computer to play the game of go at a professional level, the variables involved in WiF seem to limit the potential strength of the AI.

Strange as this may sound, fortunately, I have made a lot of mistakes when playing WiF over the board, and I look forward to making plenty more against the computer. The program doesn't have to play champion-level World in Flames to challenge me, or most of those who will play this game. I'm sure it will be a great game, and all this anxiety about the AI will be replaced with joy once the release is upon us.

_____________________________

"The creative combination lays bare the presumption of a lie." -- Lasker

Keith Henderson

(in reply to pasternakski)

Post #: 50

RE: Mode of Play - 6/20/2009 2:45:57 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames

quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

They buy because they want to play against the computer, not against people. That was what computer wargame companies promised to deliver clear back in the infancy of computer wargames. They have always accepted crap AI and computer cheating and don't care. They get by, like the same proportion of cardboard-and-paper gamers who devised (and devise) ways to play against themselves.

I agree that MWiF needs a sufficient AI in order to succeed to the degree the franchise deserves to succeed. The issue seems to be what qualifies as sufficient. I look forward to playing against the initial release of MWiF, as do many of us I'm sure, with the idea that we can suggest improvements to the AIO. Since Steve is on board for 18 months after release, I believe MWiF will have a surprisingly strong AIO within that timeframe. This is not to say it will consistently give a strong experienced player a run for his or her money in a global war scenario.

Remember that WiF has a bidding mechanic which would prove helpful in providing the computer with a handicap if the player's strength merits it, and this does not require affecting dice rolls, providing extra production, or changing the unit characteristics in any way. This is not cheating, as humans often use bidding to determine which country each player gets to control, which we have found does add a balancing factor, especially when introducing a new player to the game.

Still, for the maximum challenge in a long scenario, I do believe we will discover that actual strong players are the only option. If the Japanese can't program a computer to play the game of go at a professional level, the variables involved in WiF seem to limit the potential strength of the AI.

Strange as this may sound, fortunately, I have made a lot of mistakes when playing WiF over the board, and I look forward to making plenty more against the computer. The program doesn't have to play champion-level World in Flames to challenge me, or most of those who will play this game. I'm sure it will be a great game, and all this anxiety about the AI will be replaced with joy once the release is upon us.

Joyful release?

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to coregames)

Post #: 51

RE: Mode of Play - 6/20/2009 7:26:17 AM

SamuraiProgrmmr

Posts: 353
Joined: 10/17/2004
From: Paducah, Kentucky
Status: offline

Ain't Sublimation Wonderful

<run, duck, cover>

_____________________________

Bridge is the best wargame going .. Where else can you find a tournament every weekend?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 52

RE: Mode of Play - 6/20/2009 1:28:59 PM

BeastieDog

Posts: 95
Joined: 12/22/2006
Status: offline

I play AI initially until I get skilled or bored. If I like the game I study it using hotseat and then move on to PBEM. I play WitP. Waiting for WitP-AE. I've never played the board game, but if MWIF gets good opinions at release, I'll give it a try.

I also find AI helpful to test different strategies.

_____________________________

Dog

(in reply to Jagdtiger14)

Post #: 53

RE: Mode of Play - 6/20/2009 8:24:09 PM

coregames

Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Joyful release?

If this is the build-up to a joyful release, then we all put Sting to shame with our staying power! Does that mean that Chris Marinacci's beta was foreplay?

_____________________________

"The creative combination lays bare the presumption of a lie." -- Lasker

Keith Henderson

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 54

RE: An alternative use for the AI - 6/24/2009 12:34:19 AM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

For the initial release, the AI Opponent will play one side against a single human player. That's all. I am also focusing on only 4 scenarios: Barbarossa, Guadalcanal, Fascist Tide, and Global War. The remaining 7 scenarios will be post release (at no additional cost).

I was thinking about this the other day. I suggest working up the necessary LAIO inputs to run the Decline & Fall scenario. Just as people (and the AI) use Barbarossa and Guadalcanal to learn the game, working on that scenario with the AI would be an excellent test of how well it all works when the AI is in charge of the maximum number of pieces at the end of the game, rather than the minimum number of pieces at the start of the game. For testing this would be a lot easier than playing Global War or Fascist Tide all the way to 1944 (very, very time-consuming).

I need to play through some Decline & Fall sometime myself, to get in some practice running one of the trickiest military operations of all-time: Overlord.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 55

RE: An alternative use for the AI - 6/24/2009 1:36:44 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

For the initial release, the AI Opponent will play one side against a single human player. That's all. I am also focusing on only 4 scenarios: Barbarossa, Guadalcanal, Fascist Tide, and Global War. The remaining 7 scenarios will be post release (at no additional cost).

I was thinking about this the other day. I suggest working up the necessary LAIO inputs to run the Decline & Fall scenario. Just as people (and the AI) use Barbarossa and Guadalcanal to learn the game, working on that scenario with the AI would be an excellent test of how well it all works when the AI is in charge of the maximum number of pieces at the end of the game, rather than the minimum number of pieces at the start of the game. For testing this would be a lot easier than playing Global War or Fascist Tide all the way to 1944 (very, very time-consuming).

I need to play through some Decline & Fall sometime myself, to get in some practice running one of the trickiest military operations of all-time: Overlord.