|
Mobeer -> RE: Are Wargame AIs Fated to Suck? (6/14/2016 8:34:34 PM)
|
Flanks:
For many a game though its essential to understand what a flank is:
- for tactical then how to gain attack bonus, or how to hide weak armour etc
- for strategic then how to weaken enemy (or avoid being weakened) by losing supply lines
Some games at least appear to have those abilities, others clearly lack them. Given that some games do have these concepts, this suggests that flanks can be identified as an idea within the AI if the designers can justify putting the effort in.
AI Learning:
One of my frustrations is when an AI repeatedly uses the same failed approach.
For example in Age of Kingdoms (RTS) the AI was limited by fog of war and would actively scout until all territory was observed, after which it would stop scouting. It therefore had no idea what defences exist until battle was joined. To attack it seems to choose the shortest open path the existed when the scouting was done, but then used this over and over with similar unit strength, never learning from failed attacks.
I can't imagine it would be that difficult to have some decision tree that could improve on this, for example:
1) have 3 paths via which attack can be launched
2) launch attack using a random path
3) record total value of damage done and cost of units lost
4) develop new army at cost minimum 10% stronger than previous total cost
5) if last attack value of damage done is more than 30% of cost of units lost then use same path to attack, else use different random path
6) go to 3
then randomise the percentages just a bit as you go along
Re-usability:
In terms of reusable code, I can understand that reusing actual scripts\behaviours is difficult. Still there must be a place for reusing script formats, script editors, behaviour tree implementations etc, but separating out the technology from the data.(?)
|
|
|
|
