 |
|
dennis580
|
|
Well at least we now know the Civ III AI can cordinate ground, sea, and air units effectively in a invasion. I think this is a very big step and gives great promise for the rest of the AI in the game
|
|
| |
|
|
|
dennis580
|
|
Yea this will also be good from the computer AI. Obviously thier's going to be a limit to how much communication the computer leader and the computer controlled city's have. The cmputer controlled cities need to have good idea of thier leaders overall plans.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
squid
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by yin26
Actually, his interview wasn't detailed enough to make any conclusions yet. I've seen plenty of 'learning AI' do absolutely nothing but suck in previous games (Submarine Titans being one). |
From what I've read (and I took some AI in college), he is stressing an adaptive AI but not neccesarily learning.
learning would imply it learned from the consequences of action and from your actions.
it sounds more like it is using static evaluators to access positions than by doing any sort of learning activity. For instance, "The romans are too powerful. We must attack Rome if we are strong enough. We are strong enough. What is the closest strongest city? Thebes. What is their closest weak city? Remus. Let us attack from Thebes. Thebes, sent forth some units. Units, approach the city of Remus. Phalanx: yes, I will do so. What is the closest path to Remus? I will follow it. There is a unit in my way. It is threatening. I will not survive. Must kill unit". I am trivializing things, but yeah, his hierachial system sounds much like this.
As for expansion versus conquest versus introspection, the AI could easily decide which was a deficiency, and then use the "leader module" to order down the tree (to cities, governers, units, etc) appropraitely. Not that hard.
Anyhow, of course it's not hard. The question is it done well. If I can see bombers softening a landing area before landing a transport, I will be impressed.
It seems Soren has some good ideas though. I was assuming they would have had to consider repurcussions several turns in advance. That does not seem to be the case!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
StratAll
|
 |
Belgium
Sep 2001
time: 06:15
|
|
Quote :
Hence, the city AI is not based on pre-scripted patterns, such as Spearman, Temple, Spearman, Granary, Archer, etc. Instead, each available build item is given a value depending on the AIs environment, and the city simply builds the item with the highest value.
End quote
I have no experience with making mods, I only played a few in CivII but I guess this is very good news for mod makers. The AI will now fully understand the potential of new units created and will be able to weigh their value against one another based on its own situation.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Deathray
|
|
High Wycombe
Oct 2001
time: 05:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Rook
Has there ever been a really great AI ever? In any game? Computers are just not that capable of making decisions on such a large scale. What computers ARE good at doing is repitition. That's why they can be taught to play chess well. Chess has a limited number of moves, so the computer "brain" just goes through them all until it finds the best option. I think the same thing could be done with Civ, but on a lesser scale. During the human turn, the computer Civs can be planning, thinking ahead, and formulating a strategy, then on its turn, it acts on the strategy it came up with. Each turn it can adapt and improve on the strategy.
I just think during the long human turns, it could be doing number crunching and whatever. |
The Simtex games (Master of Orion & Master of Magic) had pretty damn good AI. Both beatable though, even without use of cheese.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
old dog
|
|
"These personalities are fully customizable through the editor, so creating AIs with different priorities is quite easy. " I am very relieved to hear this. This will have a large effect on replay value. No great surprise, though.
"Users who dislike preset personalities can turn them off altogether and let the AI adapt to its environment from a blank slate. " This is EXCELLENT news. The twentieth time I play against Shaka, it will get kind of old knowing that he will be bloodthirsty. Predictability is the enemy of replayability. Furthermore, it may well be that these "blank slate" leaders will be the most effective competition. Who can forget the Mongols in Civ 1, alone on some island, spewing out low level military units, boiling about looking for someone to fight?
"The number of civilizations in a game definitely affects AI behavior... The AI adapts to its environment, and the number of civilizations in the world is simply one of the many factors used for decision-making. For example, if a game was started on a Huge map with only 6 civs, the AI might emphasize expansion to take advantage of the extra space available." If completely true, this is the best news of all. Personally, I am very attracted to the idea of a crowded world, where 16 civs start on an average size map. I like expansion to be something you have to work at... However, for this to work as a competitive game, the AI needs to adapt to the situation... And, of course, for scenerio writing, this aspect of the AI is key. How many times have I started playing someone's interesting looking scenerio but become bored because the AI was brain dead to the situation and my strategy?
Of course, there are lot of important things that Johnson did not touch on:
1) How effective is the AI at attempting each of the types of victory? Can it assess its chances of success at each, and then pursue that strategy?
2) How well will the AI play the resource game? It's my sense that this will be the true centerpiece of Civ3, and the ability to obtain resources for yourself while denying them to your most important rivals will be the overriding theme of gameplay. If the AI does this astutely, it will go a long way towards making up for any (likely) deficiencies in waging offensive war.
3) Johnson says that the AI reacts to the situation, but does it react to its own success and failures? If two ships of soldiers sent to attack a particular city fail to make a dent, what are the chances that the same number of units will be sent to attack the same city again? If the ships were sunk, will the AI try a different route or a stronger navy?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Thue
|
|
Copenhagen, Denmark
Jan 1970
time: 06:15
|
|
quote:
Furthermore, the different AI levels communicate between each other. For example, the unit AI controlling a tank might ask the leader AI which enemy city would be best to attack. After receiving a response, the unit AI would determine its own best path to the destination. Thus, the AI is able to organize a large group of units while keeping the discrete game decisions at a lower level.
|
If the AI is worth anything it decides the best path by making a move cost map before making the decision, to factor in the precise distance.
|
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
27-10-2001 05:31
|