 |
|  |
 |
|
Your.Master
|
|
Port Elgin, Ontario, Canada
Apr 2001 time: 05:15
|
|
quote: Originally posted by drake
All civ AI is pathetic...why would civ3 be any different?
An Artificial Idiot isnt going to give any of us a challenge for long. Its only a matter of time before the patterns are figured out and deity level becomes a walk in the park. |
What you do is NOT follow the correct counter-pattern and see if you can do it...
I hope the AI is better than you think.
If it isn't, what would be neat is if the AI recognized if you were doing an anti-AI pattern and changed IT'S strategy completely to counter, in a rock-paper-scissors fashion with ~three separate AI scripts (too much to ask, I know).
But hopefully the AI poses a challenge.
*remembers CivII manual - "not even the people who made the game can beat the computer on Deity consistently"*
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Akron
|
|
quote: Originally posted by drake
Never ventured into that realm gs 
Chess certainly has a lot of variables, but not even close to the same amount as a game like civ.
I am guessing it would be harder to write a very difficult AI code for civ, than a very diificult AI code for chess.
Course I could be wrong |
Actually, I'm not sure about that. Chess is a very well known game around the world, and there are many programmers who have worked and competed against each other to create difficult AIs for chess. Also, the rules of chess are standard . Civ, on the other hand, is constantly evolving and there is only one small group of people with little competition (CTP doesn't count) developing an AI for it. If they released the source code or whatever is needed to modify the AI and several groups of programmers were to compete to make the best AI for it, then they might eventually get an AI that could hold its own on deity.
I really feel that AI is something that games often neglect to develop fully in order to cut corners, as stuff like cool graphics and features seem to be noticed far before the AI by most casual gamers. Also, casual gamers may get frustrated by difficult AI.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
dennis580
|
|
Dan has said sevral times that Firaxis testers had a cheap mode they were using. So don't judge the AI until you play the game. You just might be shocked at how skilled it is.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
squid
|
|
Also, there are two fundamental approaches to AI (see Russell&Norwig)....you either program to make logical decisions or you program to make it think as a human would....the second type is more cognitive. Chess is more of a brute force hack....until we get neural nets involved in the process and through out the databases, chess AI does not learn.... it does lots of math and generates lots of data. Chess AI's do not think even close as to the way they think. They just evaluate every single option and every result, with a few optimizations. There isn't anything advanced or noble about a Chess AI, but it is hard to make a good one run quickly and to make one think like we do.
Civ has it easier in some ways but harder in others. The Civ has priorities other than "get more points", it has strategic goals. Rather complex. I suppose much could be learned from looking at what FreeCiv is doing....maybe I'll read up on it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
This new histograph scoring will definitely be different & interesting. After the game is out someone should put a poll up whether it is better or worse. From what I understand it seems that the Civ that wins could even be a Civ that died decades ago... that you killed.
Last edited by Pyrodrew on 25-10-2001 at 18:42
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15. Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|