Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Distant Worlds 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] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> RE: Distant Worlds AI Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 11:24:18 AM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lihnit23

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania
Note to self: Try using DisallowedResearchArea tomorrow ... might be another way to improve AI Weapon Research focus.

A much better way to improve AI research is to use DisallowedComponentIDs. For example, I modded the Boskaras to only use rail guns and their race specific torps. They completely ignore all of the beams past maxos blasters (I need the maxos blasters to get to ion defenses), ion pulse, gravity stuff, fighters, non-race torps, assault pods, and assault missiles (I need earlier missiles to get point defense).

I put the line in as follows: DisallowedComponentIds ;1,3,2,106,110,115,116,118,119,113,117,114,108,5,6,7,8,16,105,11,12

Sounds great but I cannot get it to work.

I tried to do the opposite ... disallow a bunch of components so the AI would focus more on beams ... and ended up with a bunch of technologies on the disallowed list like Advanced Area Weapons.


'Disallowed ComponentIds: comma-separated list of component Id values that cannot be researched by this race
DisallowedComponentIds ;4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,19,21,24,26,27,106,107,108,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,126,127,128


I also set the following:

'Disallowed Research Areas 1,2,3: areas that this race cannot research: 0=None, 1=Torpedoes, 2=Missiles, 3=Area Weapons, 4=Ion Weapons, 5=Fighters, 6=Armor, 7=Hyper Disruption, 8=Sensors
DisallowedResearchArea1 ;2
DisallowedResearchArea2 ;3
DisallowedResearchArea3 ;5




(in reply to Lihnit23)
Post #: 121
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 11:26:25 AM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tcby
Just got around to reading all this. Good work Ice for doing these tests and reporting the effects of minor changes. Big thanks to to Erik and Elliot for being open to suggestions and active in this area. The biggest problem I'm having at the moment is that I often lose incentive to finish my games after a somewhat early point. This is because I prefer to start in prewarp for thematic reasons, but the ability of the AI to keep pace in terms of research and colony growth is very limited. Because of this I tend to have more challenging (but less immersive) games from a classic start.

I do believe that the AI is fundamentally good; small changes to exploration priority, spaceport design, and taxation policy will surely make a great difference. As Ice has demonstrated.

As a side note, I got a very vivid image from Ice here:
"[puts head under the water and screams]"
...I laughed out loud.

Well said and thanks Tcby.



(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 122
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 11:28:53 AM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom_Holsinger
DW2 letting players similarly mod the AI would add enormous amount to the game's legs.

Agreed! At the very top of the DW2 design document please!

(in reply to Tom_Holsinger)
Post #: 123
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 11:33:43 AM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Spidey
@ Ice
How about using player stunts? If players can have fun with labs on mines then why can't the AI? If we're cutting costs by throwing scanners on mines instead of state bases then why can't the AI? And wouldn't this also serve to ensure research capacity without resulting in the AI going bankrupt?

It's a good idea but it means a slow start to research. Spaceports get it going a lot faster simply because that is what the AI normally builds first.

(in reply to Spidey)
Post #: 124
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 11:53:32 AM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lihnit23

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania
Note to self: Try using DisallowedResearchArea tomorrow ... might be another way to improve AI Weapon Research focus.

A much better way to improve AI research is to use DisallowedComponentIDs. For example, I modded the Boskaras to only use rail guns and their race specific torps. They completely ignore all of the beams past maxos blasters (I need the maxos blasters to get to ion defenses), ion pulse, gravity stuff, fighters, non-race torps, assault pods, and assault missiles (I need earlier missiles to get point defense).

I put the line in as follows: DisallowedComponentIds ;1,3,2,106,110,115,116,118,119,113,117,114,108,5,6,7,8,16,105,11,12

Sounds great but I cannot get it to work.

I tried to do the opposite ... disallow a bunch of components so the AI would focus more on beams ... and ended up with a bunch of technologies on the disallowed list like Advanced Area Weapons.


'Disallowed ComponentIds: comma-separated list of component Id values that cannot be researched by this race
DisallowedComponentIds ;4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,19,21,24,26,27,106,107,108,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,126,127,128


I also set the following:

'Disallowed Research Areas 1,2,3: areas that this race cannot research: 0=None, 1=Torpedoes, 2=Missiles, 3=Area Weapons, 4=Ion Weapons, 5=Fighters, 6=Armor, 7=Hyper Disruption, 8=Sensors
DisallowedResearchArea1 ;2
DisallowedResearchArea2 ;3
DisallowedResearchArea3 ;5



I also tried the below in addition to the above. No material difference beyond the normal minor random variations. Can others please check this?


'Tech Focus 1: 0=None, 1=Beams, 2=Phasers, 3=Rail Guns, 4=Torpedoes, 5=Bombard Weapons, 6=Missiles, 7=Area Weapons, 8=Ion Weapons, 9=Fighters, 10=Armor, 11=Shields, 12=Reactors, 13=Main Thrust Engines, 14=Vectoring Engines, 15=HyperDrives, 16=Hyper Disruption, 17=Construction, 18=Damage Control, 19=Targetting, 20=Countermeasures, 21=Sensors, 22=Medicine, 23=Recreation, 24=Tractor Beams, 25=Assault Pods, 26=Graviton Beams, 27=Gravity Area Weapons, 28=Super Beam Weapons, 29=Super Area Weapons
TechFocus1 ;1

'Tech Focus 2: 0=None, 1=Beams, 2=Phasers, 3=Rail Guns, 4=Torpedoes, 5=Bombard Weapons, 6=Missiles, 7=Area Weapons, 8=Ion Weapons, 9=Fighters, 10=Armor, 11=Shields, 12=Reactors, 13=Main Thrust Engines, 14=Vectoring Engines, 15=HyperDrives, 16=Hyper Disruption, 17=Construction, 18=Damage Control, 19=Targetting, 20=Countermeasures, 21=Sensors, 22=Medicine, 23=Recreation, 24=Tractor Beams, 25=Assault Pods, 26=Graviton Beams, 27=Gravity Area Weapons, 28=Super Beam Weapons, 29=Super Area Weapons
TechFocus2 ;1



< Message edited by Icemania -- 6/4/2014 12:54:02 PM >

(in reply to Icemania)
Post #: 125
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 12:26:12 PM   
Tcby


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/16/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
Icemania, can you clarify what the issue is with those disallowed technologies (ie Lihnit23's approach)? I'm running a test game with 11 boskaran AI at the moment, and preventing them from pursuing entire trees does seem to have its benefits.

edit: although there is a slight problem with the list of disallowed components provided by Lihnit23. It disallows the first torpedo tech, thereby preventing boskarans from researching the prerequisite technology for their racial tech.

< Message edited by Tcby -- 6/4/2014 1:28:02 PM >

(in reply to Icemania)
Post #: 126
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 12:28:26 PM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
Refer here Tcby. In short I haven't found a way yet for it to work ... at all. It researches disallowed technologies anyway!




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 127
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 12:31:23 PM   
Tcby


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/16/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
Ah! I'll keep my test game running and see if I can reproduce it.

(in reply to Icemania)
Post #: 128
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 12:51:05 PM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
And in Empire Policy I also have: (i.e. prioritise beams!!!)


ResearchDesignTechFocus1 ;1
ResearchDesignTechFocus2 ;1
ResearchDesignTechFocus3 ;1
ResearchDesignTechFocus4 ;1
ResearchDesignTechFocus5 ;1
ResearchDesignTechFocus6 ;1

(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 129
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 12:51:26 PM   
Tcby


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/16/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
4 years in, and all the races have performed more or less the same research:
pulse/maxos/improved maxos,
assault tactics + basic armour -> armoured ground assault->either battlefield sabotage or 2nd tier armour.
fighters->light interceptors->tactical interceptors

No research in disallowed fields yet.

edit: This is without specifying tech focus or disallowed research in the race.txt

6 years in, all AI continue to drill down into troop tech. No interest in rail guns or missiles (the only available weapon tech, except for the last improvement to the maxos) yet.

< Message edited by Tcby -- 6/4/2014 2:04:42 PM >

(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 130
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 1:04:29 PM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
Empire Policy Improvements

Now that Base designs have had comments please refer for observations on the Empire Policy Files intended to improve AI performance via a patch (not a mod as these are not specials).

1. Academies are not needed on every world and add no value en masse so they can set to a high population. Change 2-5M to 15M. Each Academy has a 2k maintenance cost!

2. The AI builds far too small ships and far too few large ships. I proposed inverting the proportions i.e.
(a) Capital Ships 7% change to 24%
(b) Carrier 8% change to 18%
(c) Cruiser 15% change to 20%
(d) Destroyer 20% change to 15%
(e) Escort 18% change to 8%
(f) Frigate 24% change to 7%

3. Large Spaceports are huge structures with high maintenance costs. Change 3B to 10B. Some worlds will only have a Medium Spaceport ... fine.



< Message edited by Icemania -- 6/4/2014 2:10:32 PM >

(in reply to Icemania)
Post #: 131
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 1:07:14 PM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tcby

4 years in, and all the races have performed more or less the same research:
pulse/maxos/improved maxos,
assault tactics + basic armour -> armoured ground assault->either battlefield sabotage or 2nd tier armour.
fighters->light interceptors->tactical interceptors

No research in disallowed fields yet.

edit: This is without specifying tech focus or disallowed research in the race.txt

6 years in, all AI continue to drill down into troop tech. No interest in rail guns or missiles (the only available weapon tech, except for the last improvement to the maxos) yet.

What is your Disallowed Components string?

Suggest restart a game with my Disallowed Components string or a variation?

(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 132
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 1:11:17 PM   
Tcby


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/16/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
I'm using the string from Lihnit23's post:

;1,3,2,106,110,115,116,118,119,113,117,114,108,5,6,7,8,16,105,11,12

I'll restart with your changes.

(in reply to Icemania)
Post #: 133
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 1:16:02 PM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
Changed ResearchDesignTechFocus to 0 (None) and DisallowedResearchArea to 0 (None) ... but kept DisallowedComponents ... same thing as the image above.


(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 134
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 1:32:54 PM   
Tcby


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/16/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
So far I'm not getting any research into disallowed tech, but for some reason every weapon tech is now disallowed. So the AI can only research troop strength and armour related technology in that tree. Not sure what I did wrong there...methinks this is a problem for the morning.

(in reply to Icemania)
Post #: 135
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 1:35:51 PM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
I just tried Lihnit's string and it's researched Ship Boarding, Gravitic Weapons and Torpedoes ... (very cheap research 4 year mark)

It's only 9.30pm dude ...

(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 136
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 1:38:54 PM   
Bingeling

 

Posts: 5186
Joined: 8/12/2010
Status: offline
And you did not put a "comment" symbol at the start of the line? Not sure if it is ; or whatever.

(in reply to Icemania)
Post #: 137
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 1:57:48 PM   
Tcby


Posts: 342
Joined: 12/16/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
It's midnight in this part of the country :)

Who are you referring to Bingeling?

(in reply to Bingeling)
Post #: 138
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 3:50:43 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
With the noted upcoming changes, I'll be delaying any updates to my design templates till I see what changes. From my end, the project is on hold until then.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 139
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 3:55:01 PM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
Fully agree Shark

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 140
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 5:09:51 PM   
Lihnit23

 

Posts: 45
Joined: 10/3/2010
Status: offline
Wow. I just started a test game. My Boskara are zipping through rail gun tech and are now researching the 2nd stage racial torp tech. In the policy files, I have overall focus: raw power, area focus: weapons; tech emphasis 1: torps, 2: rail guns, 4: construction, 5: hyper disruption, 6: armor.

Have you adjusted the policy files in-game? The modding guide says that policy file settings override the race settings.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tcby

...edit: although there is a slight problem with the list of disallowed components provided by Lihnit23. It disallows the first torpedo tech, thereby preventing boskarans from researching the prerequisite technology for their racial tech.


My string works perfectly in my game. The Boskaras are midway through stage 2 racial torpedo tech even though the starting torp is disallowed.

(in reply to Icemania)
Post #: 141
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 5:38:17 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
OK, looked and am redoing stuff based on the new.

There will be 12 base types of templates for me. Basically 3 sets of templates based on energy, projectile, mixed and special weapons.

Of course this will take some time, so be patient.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Lihnit23)
Post #: 142
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/4/2014 5:39:34 PM   
Bingeling

 

Posts: 5186
Joined: 8/12/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tcby

It's midnight in this part of the country :)

Who are you referring to Bingeling?

Icemania, the post directly above.


(in reply to Tcby)
Post #: 143
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/5/2014 3:21:00 PM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
Okay I have retested twice with 1.9.5.2 patch up to the 4 year mark.

Research Performance
In both tests the AI built one more Energy Research Station so performance has improved. The AI is researching at 70-75% of capacity. Fast Energy of course but very slow Weapons and High Technology Research.

Exploration Performance
In both tests neither of the 2 Explorers went straight to the 2 Ruins as proposed. The pattern was either explore a world or two then asteroids. Or explore asteroids then a world or two. Ignore the asteroids guys until later! Warp Field found at the 2.5 Year and 3 Year mark. What was fantastic was to see the Explorer move to the next target as soon as the resource/ruin was found without waiting to get to the centre of their current targets. I lost count of the number of times I suggested that ... you all owe me a beer!

Weapons Research Order
Unchanged i.e. completely daft.

High Tech Research Order
Why does the AI research Proximity Sensors (etc, etc) before Enhanced Resource Exploration given the Exploration AI change that has been made? Elliot earlier in the order please ...

Base Design
Large Spaceport Construction Yards and Docking Bays increased 50%.
Mining Stations have 5 Shields rather than 3, 5 Weapons rather than 3.
Gas Mining Stations have 6 Docking Bays rather than 4.
Small changes compared to what was proposed. Let's monitor performance.
None of the other suggestions from Post 36 have been implemented.

I hope a lot more here is coming in the 1.9.5.3 patch as Erik hinted earlier.

(in reply to Bingeling)
Post #: 144
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/5/2014 3:24:57 PM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bingeling
And you did not put a "comment" symbol at the start of the line? Not sure if it is ; or whatever.

Yes I checked the syntax. More than a few times!


(in reply to Bingeling)
Post #: 145
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/5/2014 3:36:31 PM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lihnit23
Wow. I just started a test game. My Boskara are zipping through rail gun tech and are now researching the 2nd stage racial torp tech. In the policy files, I have overall focus: raw power, area focus: weapons; tech emphasis 1: torps, 2: rail guns, 4: construction, 5: hyper disruption, 6: armor.

Have you adjusted the policy files in-game? The modding guide says that policy file settings override the race settings.

I've changed them back to the default just in case ... even though there were no clashes i.e. "more beams" ... and still can't get it to work.



< Message edited by Icemania -- 6/5/2014 4:40:18 PM >

(in reply to Lihnit23)
Post #: 146
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/5/2014 3:53:28 PM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
Maybe Disallowed Components gets overruled if any of the ship design templates have those components ... ?

< Message edited by Icemania -- 6/5/2014 4:53:51 PM >

(in reply to Icemania)
Post #: 147
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/5/2014 3:58:45 PM   
Icemania


Posts: 1847
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline
It's an absolute smorgasboard of weapons in the ship and base template files. A focus on one weapon type ... what a difference it would make to the AI ...

< Message edited by Icemania -- 6/5/2014 5:21:33 PM >

(in reply to Icemania)
Post #: 148
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/5/2014 11:47:25 PM   
Tehlongone


Posts: 208
Joined: 12/21/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fenrislokison

While i agree on the general idea you exposed, i must say, having the private sector paying to do state stuff exists in reality, especially in the security area and health care area.

For example, in France, asbestos in buildings isn't authorized anymore (since some years now) and old buildings using it must be cleaned, but the owners of the buildings have to pay for it, not the state.

another example is that cars must be equipped with safety belts and be built such as in case of an accident, the car crushes itself to absorb the impact. All this is paid by the buyers of the cars, in most case, the private sector.

Well, for these examples, you could object that the state doesn't sell the services or objects it forces people to use, but here is one:
- in France, electricity production is done by EDF company, which is property of the state, so the state sells electricity to people. At the same time, there are regulations to equip buildings with propers electrical installations used by EDF to monitor electrical distributions. These electrical installations are partly paid by the customers, in other words the private sector.

So while i perfectly understood your point regarding abuse, it is still very possible to have the state enact laws forcing buildings to be equipped with such or such equipment and having the state being the only seller of said equipment.
A bit dirty, but perfectly valid.

The abuse in the game comes from the fact the private sector is much much stronger than it is IRL so it can endure a lot more and the fact that game people are just sheeps, much more than in reality as they don't strike or rebel as they should be.

Right it's not unrealistic that the state would want to do it, it's unrealistic that it would be carried out mindlessly. Putting in small cheap things is realistic, like a proximity sensor even though it doesn't really need it from a selfish POV.
A long range sensor, however, is pushing it. An exploit. It would be a valid strategy only if the game reacted to it. Excessive defenses and research stations are even worse, there's no way private companies would have accepted paying for that.

(in reply to fenrislokison)
Post #: 149
RE: Distant Worlds AI - 6/6/2014 12:12:03 AM   
Spidey


Posts: 411
Joined: 12/8/2013
Status: offline
We're not talking about radar towers on garden sheds, though. We're talking about installations floating around in the super-hostile environment we call space. It seems plenty realistic to me that the state has to approve designs and it further seems plenty realistic to me that the state makes an agreement with corporate powerhouses. They supply the long range scanners and in return the state won't tax them. They do the research and share their results and in return they don't get taxed. They get the benefits of the advances they create, but the state gets to share those benefits.

There is an issue in DW: Universe, though. If you order retrofits on civilian ships and bases, instead of paying for those retrofits, you're getting paid. Which means if you have 50 stations and you tell the to retrofit to something expensive, you get a crapton of money. I'm guessing the guy who started this discussion of private vs public sector expenses ran right into this without realising that it was a bug. For that matter, I guess the beta testers did too. Well, I'm assuming they did and that it's a bug because if it's as designed then all this talk about challenge and AI and whatnot just became a complete joke.

(in reply to Tehlongone)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series >> RE: Distant Worlds AI Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.641