AI (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> John Tiller's Campaign Series



Message

lgsptlnd -> AI (5/24/2010 8:25:41 PM)

As a long time fan of the Talonsoft games and one who most often plays against the A.I., I've suspected that it's in the code, that the A.I. is "informed" that a certain percentage of their units are targeted by indirect fire and conversely that some human player units are "revealed" to the A.I.s' indirect fire. Does anyone know if I'm correct in that assumption?



jreebel -> RE: AI (5/27/2010 10:36:26 PM)

I've always suspected it.



osiris_slith -> RE: AI (5/31/2010 10:37:39 PM)

HI

The AI has issues that have been known for a long time but in the world of Matrix there is nothing wrong with the AI. Over the past year or so more than a few individuals have made very reasonable suggestions for AI improvement etc and not much has happened. That being said I cant really blame them for not wanting to fix the AI because lets face it this game is old. As many mods and patches you want to throw at it the bottom line is this game is ancient in the world of gaming and the game engine is rusty along with the AI which suffers from some kind amnesia. 

Rene



33sherman -> RE: AI (6/1/2010 4:04:51 PM)

In lieu of an improved AI, a nice feature would be the ability to double or triple the amount of Computer player's units in randomly-generated battles & DCGs.



kool_kat -> RE: AI (6/1/2010 7:48:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: osiris

HI

The AI has issues that have been known for a long time but in the world of Matrix there is nothing wrong with the AI. Over the past year or so more than a few individuals have made very reasonable suggestions for AI improvement etc and not much has happened. That being said I cant really blame them for not wanting to fix the AI because lets face it this game is old. As many mods and patches you want to throw at it the bottom line is this game is ancient in the world of gaming and the game engine is rusty along with the AI which suffers from some kind amnesia. 

Rene



IMO, if you are only playing against the AI... you have not seen 1/10th of how this game can perform. CS really (and only shines) with human versus human play.

I gave up playing against the AI years ago (too easy to beat HAL)... and only play against human opponents.



rich12545 -> RE: AI (6/2/2010 4:02:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mwest


quote:

ORIGINAL: osiris

HI

The AI has issues that have been known for a long time but in the world of Matrix there is nothing wrong with the AI. Over the past year or so more than a few individuals have made very reasonable suggestions for AI improvement etc and not much has happened. That being said I cant really blame them for not wanting to fix the AI because lets face it this game is old. As many mods and patches you want to throw at it the bottom line is this game is ancient in the world of gaming and the game engine is rusty along with the AI which suffers from some kind amnesia. 

Rene



IMO, if you are only playing against the AI... you have not seen 1/10th of how this game can perform. CS really (and only shines) with human versus human play.

I gave up playing against the AI years ago (too easy to beat HAL)... and only play against human opponents.


Well, the game isn't being sold as a h2h game only. If it's being sold with an ai, most people including me will play against Hal exclusively. That's the way it is. My understanding is that after Modern Games 1 comes out, maybe in 2011 or 2012 the way it's going, the ai will be worked on.



Jason Petho -> RE: AI (6/2/2010 4:45:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rich12545

My understanding is that after Modern Games 1 comes out, maybe in 2011 or 2012 the way it's going, the ai will be worked on.


That is correct, HAL will be worked on after the initial release of Modern Wars: Volume I.

Which is getting closer. Just finished building a Linked Campaign Game for the Middle East portion. Good times!

Jason Petho



V22 Osprey -> RE: AI (6/2/2010 5:29:02 AM)

Can we have modern wars out by August 2010?



Jason Petho -> RE: AI (6/2/2010 7:57:25 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

Can we have modern wars out by August 2010?


I'm hoping, yes... I have a baby coming in October and won't have the vast amount of time I dedicate to the Modern Wars as I do now.

So yes, before September!

Jason Petho




1925frank -> RE: AI (6/2/2010 1:33:53 PM)

Congratulations, Jason!  And to your wife too, who probably deserves a little credit.



kool_kat -> RE: AI (6/2/2010 4:19:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rich12545

Well, the game isn't being sold as a h2h game only. If it's being sold with an ai, most people including me will play against Hal exclusively. That's the way it is. My understanding is that after Modern Games 1 comes out, maybe in 2011 or 2012 the way it's going, the ai will be worked on.



Yes, I understand. But during the 1-2 years+ before HAL gets a "brain transplant" ... why not try H2H play? When I first was introduced to CS... I played the AI exclusively. I got pretty good at tactics... or so I thought until I tried my first H2H play! [X(] I got "killed" by my human opponent. Moves and tactics that worked wonderfully against the AI failed miserably against a "live" opponent. Playing against a human opponent, I had to "unlearn" nearly everything that worked well when playing against the AI.

So, I urge you and other players to at least give H2H play a try. I think it will really expand your game playing horizons! [8D]

But, in the end, players are free to play CS as they like - either against the AI or H2H. That's the beauty of it. [:)]



Miamieagle -> RE: AI (6/2/2010 5:08:58 PM)

Be careful what you ask for!

It might be just what you get!

In my opinion the Ai just needs a few adjustments not a complete overhaul.

It could become unbeatetable and thus unplayable!

I hope the new Ai upgrade will be optional!



Miamieagle -> RE: AI (6/2/2010 5:09:51 PM)

By the way Congratulation!



osiris_slith -> RE: AI (6/3/2010 6:02:30 AM)

HI

The game is not marketed as H2H player game and I would say a good portion of players would just like to kick back in the evening and play a few turns against the AI since most of us have jobs and so on. Also because u dont have to wait 2 days or 2 weeks for a bloody turn to be done by the inefficient human player..there is no fun playing 1 turn a day..its boring..I wanna win or lose in the same evening is my preference...I wont dispute that playing against a live player is much more challenging and on occasion I do..but it takes way too much time. Even direct internet play u still need time to play it at least 1-2 hours..to get a small game in.

Rene



kool_kat -> RE: AI (6/3/2010 11:45:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: osiris

HI

The game is not marketed as H2H player game and I would say a good portion of players would just like to kick back in the evening and play a few turns against the AI since most of us have jobs and so on. Also because u dont have to wait 2 days or 2 weeks for a bloody turn to be done by the inefficient human player..there is no fun playing 1 turn a day..its boring..I wanna win or lose in the same evening is my preference...I wont dispute that playing against a live player is much more challenging and on occasion I do..but it takes way too much time. Even direct internet play u still need time to play it at least 1-2 hours..to get a small game in.

Rene


I understand your points. But who says you have to have only one H2H game underway at a time? [&:]

Most players I know, who play H2H exclusively, have several games underway at a time. This way... a player can almost be guaranteed there is a game turn (or multiple ones) waiting in your email inbox when you get home from work.

I agree with the time committement for PBeM. If you are looking for instant gratification... PBeM is not for you.

But, to each his own? [8D]



berto -> RE: AI (6/3/2010 2:35:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mwest
I understand your points. But who says you have to have only one H2H game underway at a time? [&:]

Most players I know, who play H2H exclusively, have several games underway at a time. This way... a player can almost be guaranteed there is a game turn (or multiple ones) waiting in your email inbox when you get home from work.

I agree with the time committement for PBeM. If you are looking for instant gratification... PBeM is not for you.

But, to each his own? [8D]

I like watching a 2-3 hour full-length feature film more than watching a sequence of 1/2 to 1 hour TV shows over the course of an evening.

I prefer concerti and symphonies to the 3-minutes-per-song hit parade on pop radio.

I enjoy a good book better than a good magazine.

And I favor an evening or a weekend playing a single game with unbroken, continuous narrative to bits and pieces of PBEM games in fits and starts.

"Instant gratification"? Whatever.

Yup, to each his own. [8D]



kool_kat -> RE: AI (6/3/2010 3:31:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: berto
Yup, to each his own. [8D]


Yep. That's the beauty of CS... players can enjoy it in their own ways... whether playing H2H or against the AI. [8D]

Play on?



MrRoadrunner -> RE: AI (6/3/2010 5:31:57 PM)

I would hope that if some want a tougher AI they would turn extreme assault on and also modify the scenario so that the AI's HQ's would not flit about the map in search of a reason to die. [;)]

Asking the rest of us to suffer through a senseless upgrade that may actually hurt the game is a bit much? [8|]

RR



TAIL GUNNER -> RE: AI (6/4/2010 12:26:26 AM)

A simple AI fix would be to include a clever 'if-then' statement that would negate the senseless firing onto a target hex that has zero chance of damage...

"Attack = 1"
"Defense = 7"


"No Effect"
[8|]



Huib -> RE: AI (6/5/2010 9:21:27 PM)

One of the main reasons HAL seems so stupid is because a lot of the existing scenarios designed for play vs Computer are weak designs. It seems the old designers did not have enough experience as "players" to judge when a scn is a challenge and when it is too easy. Not having EA also did not help. Who could foresee back then that the game would by hijacked by a gamey surround, disrupt, assault trick. No HAL would ever have an answer on such exploitation.

There is really a lot to be won there.

I just finished designing an LCG for Modern Wars and I'm sure even veteran players will have to work hard to be succesful in that one.
In fact in some of the scenarios I lost more sp than HAL did! Over the last year I lost more games to HAL than to human opponents...

Huib



MrRoadrunner -> RE: AI (6/5/2010 11:27:26 PM)

I've stated, and still believe, that EA is as gamey or more so than non EA.
You are chiseled in granite so I will not bore anyone with any explanations.
I'm just glad it is optional.

RR



kool_kat -> RE: AI (6/6/2010 11:37:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRoadrunner

I've stated, and still believe, that EA is as gamey or more so than non EA.
You are chiseled in granite so I will not bore anyone with any explanations.
I'm just glad it is optional.

RR



All CS players can be thankful EA is "optional" instead of hard wired into the game? [8D]



MrRoadrunner -> RE: AI (6/6/2010 3:30:04 PM)

The problem will still be that the new upgrades will always have EA in mind. Unless they put in a more mild assault algorithm and make that one the default?
IMO, EA is still a bane to the system. [:(] Even as an option.

RR



bshirt7 -> RE: AI (6/9/2010 11:11:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Huib

One of the main reasons HAL seems so stupid is because a lot of the existing scenarios designed for play vs Computer are weak designs. It seems the old designers did not have enough experience as "players" to judge when a scn is a challenge and when it is too easy. Not having EA also did not help. Who could foresee back then that the game would by hijacked by a gamey surround, disrupt, assault trick. No HAL would ever have an answer on such exploitation.

There is really a lot to be won there.

I just finished designing an LCG for Modern Wars and I'm sure even veteran players will have to work hard to be succesful in that one.
In fact in some of the scenarios I lost more sp than HAL did! Over the last year I lost more games to HAL than to human opponents...

Huib


I agree.

I remember some Talonsoft scenarios that had me shaking like a leaf on a tree. I too do not have the endless time required to spend on H2H play. With a well designed scenario the AI will give you all the challenges you want.

Indeed, to each their own.



kool_kat -> RE: AI (6/9/2010 11:39:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bshirt7

I too do not have the endless time required to spend on H2H play. With a well designed scenario the AI will give you all the challenges you want.

Indeed, to each their own.


Frankly, H2H play does NOT require "endless" time... in fact, making a PBeM turn is usually only a 20 - 30 minute exercise or less (depending on the scenario size). Most PBeM players have several games underway... so you can almost guarantee that on any given day, you will have a turn waiting to play in your email inbox.

When I first got started with CS over 12 years ago (under the TalonSoft brand)... I played the AI exclusively. However, once I was introduced to H2H play... I never looked back!

I might fire up a scenario (while I'm waiting for the next PBeM turn) and play a few rounds with HAL. But I quickly realize why I prefer H2H play!

So... if you play the AI and are satisfied with your gaming experience... more power to you! Congratulations! [:D]

But if you have never played H2H... then I urge you to give PBeM a try. IMHO, it is well worth the time investment! [8D]



torpoint -> RE: AI (6/9/2010 9:32:19 PM)

I have to disagree Mike! All fair and well, you can have a few games on the go with PBEM but, their is no spontaneity for many, hopping from one game to the other every other day.
I designed a massive game which, with the average turn rate, could have taken another year and a half to play out. If the A1 was fine then it would have been great to play it solo as and when I wished. Since finishing it I have taken a selection of games on and have not had anywhere near the enjoyment I've had with self-designed scenarios. Unfortunately the limitations of the A1 means there are only a very few one can test them out with. Many others feel the same. A decent A1 is just as important to many players as PBEM is to others.
In various posts you 'push' the pbem and the fact you can play many games at the same time, ''20/30 minutes per turn'' Given a selection of 4 to 7 games on the go, all disjointed, are you telling me that it cannot be as enjoyable to play one game against the A1 playing a couple of hours per night, given that the A1 is a 'worthy opponent'' ?
People posting here are discussing improving the A1, let them have their' say, eh?



kool_kat -> RE: AI (6/9/2010 9:48:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: torpoint

...are you telling me that it cannot be as enjoyable to play one game against the A1 playing a couple of hours per night, given that the A1 is a 'worthy opponent'' ?
People posting here are discussing improving the A1, let them have their' say, eh?


I never stated that! Please note that I would very much like to have a "more worthy" AI in CS! It would be a great asset! But, given the fact that the current AI is "subpar" at best... and a "rebuilt" and "improved" AI is at least 1-2 years in the future... why not try PBeM? [&:]



torpoint -> RE: AI (6/9/2010 10:38:58 PM)

Because the posters' may not be interested in PBEM? I believe someone said that?
Perhaps if people pushed the A1 revamp, rather than plugging PBEM, then it may be conceivable that Matrix may put more emphasis in improving the A1 sooner than 1-2 years?



kool_kat -> RE: AI (6/9/2010 10:56:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: torpoint

Because the posters' may not be interested in PBEM? I believe someone said that?
Perhaps if people pushed the A1 revamp, rather than plugging PBEM, then it may be conceivable that Matrix may put more emphasis in improving the A1 sooner than 1-2 years?




My apologies. I`ll keep my posts focused on the CS AI.



MrRoadrunner -> RE: AI (6/9/2010 11:23:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: torpoint

I have to disagree Mike! All fair and well, you can have a few games on the go with PBEM but, their is no spontaneity for many, hopping from one game to the other every other day.
I designed a massive game which, with the average turn rate, could have taken another year and a half to play out. If the A1 was fine then it would have been great to play it solo as and when I wished. Since finishing it I have taken a selection of games on and have not had anywhere near the enjoyment I've had with self-designed scenarios. Unfortunately the limitations of the A1 means there are only a very few one can test them out with. Many others feel the same. A decent A1 is just as important to many players as PBEM is to others.
In various posts you 'push' the pbem and the fact you can play many games at the same time, ''20/30 minutes per turn'' Given a selection of 4 to 7 games on the go, all disjointed, are you telling me that it cannot be as enjoyable to play one game against the A1 playing a couple of hours per night, given that the A1 is a 'worthy opponent'' ?
People posting here are discussing improving the A1, let them have their' say, eh?


I like when the forum volunteer police come out to direct the flow of discussions. [8|]

Might I say that if you design a scenario that is too big to play that you have lost the perspective of game scale?
Hopefully it is not one of those 300 to 400 turn monsters that totally disregard the game scale and developers intent? [X(]
That said, anyone can make any size or kind of scenario they wish. It's the best part of the game when you can remove scenario files and not download custom scenario that you do not like?

Mike has his points and should not be shut down due to discussions of the AI. Stifling Mike's enthusiasm for PBEM is in bad form. He never put anyone down for just playing versus the AI? [:-]

I do not mind having a campaign to play, in the back pocket, when my PBEM games are running slow. I cannot play the AI in scenarios except for using it as an opponent during the balancing of scenario design process.

The AI will not ever be perfected. I think playing it with extreme assault rules on and fixing the AI HQ's in the scenario file before starting play goes a long way to helping it to be a more formidable opponent.

Play on in any form you wish. It's always made the game great.

RR



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1