Tweet
I would also point out that in that ISDG Firaxis were eliminated exceedingly early. Their programming is only as good as their skill at the game anyone? 
-
One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry. -
No. It just means: Not every top Civ player is also a great programmer, and vice versa.Comment
-
True, but it isn't an unworkable problem. That sounds pretty awful about Civ3:PTW ISDG though.Originally posted by Dauphin
My comment was kind of more metaphoric. If you choose the AI that performs best against other AIs it will probably mean it is employing tactics that are disliked, unfair, exploits etc. I got fed up with the Civ3:PTW ISDG because it turned into a game of winning through best use of exploitsand through cheatingthan through best skills or tactics.
In short I was saying that the winning AI is not necessarily the best choice of AI for a game.
-Drachasor"If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for her prescription and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandmother. If there's an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties. It's that fundamental belief -- I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper -- that makes this country work." - Barack ObamaComment
-
There is no shortage of people who think they can do better (I may be guilty of this as well...Originally posted by Drachasor
Does anyone have any good reasons to think a whole community couldn't outdo one person?
). Perhaps someone who believes they can do better can apply for a job and go head-to-head with a staff programmer to see who stays. 
"And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country. My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man." -- JFK Inaugural, 1961
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is not a vice." -- Barry Goldwater, 1964 GOP Nomination acceptance speech (not George W. Bush 40 years later...)
2004 Presidential Candidate
2008 Presidential Candidate (for what its worth)Comment
-
The point is that you don't need *one* person that can do better. Everyone in the community could be worse. The benefit of the community approach is you have an entire pool of people to think about a problem; entire pool of people to be creative about it.; an entire pool of people to watch for errors; an entire pool of people to refine the program. That is what makes it better than one person or a small team. Also, if someone in the community that wasn't part of the original project runs into some issue, then he can relay it to get fixed, or try to fix it himself (for the community AI code would be openly available) and submit the changes.Originally posted by Vince278
There is no shortage of people who think they can do better (I may be guilty of this as well... ). Perhaps someone who believes they can do better can apply for a job and go head-to-head with a staff programmer to see who stays.
Open Source is powerful in the long run because of these facts. It starts pretty good, and gets better and better.
-Drachasor"If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for her prescription and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandmother. If there's an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties. It's that fundamental belief -- I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper -- that makes this country work." - Barack ObamaComment
-
I agree that open sourcing is great (and I'm eagerly awaiting the results of the CtP2 project). I'm just afraid that a group effort is only as good as those coordinating the project and making the decisions on what goes and what stays. Also, the larger the group the more chaos that gets introduced into the system. I've seen too many well intentioned projects fall victim to these problems.
"And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country. My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man." -- JFK Inaugural, 1961
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is not a vice." -- Barry Goldwater, 1964 GOP Nomination acceptance speech (not George W. Bush 40 years later...)
2004 Presidential Candidate
2008 Presidential Candidate (for what its worth)Comment
-
Please, do not display your programming "knowledge" here.Originally posted by Drachasor
You aren't that familiar with how open source programming works, are you?
1. Interest != ability and skillOriginally posted by Drachasor
Or is that you think there'd be basically no one interested in improving cIV's AI? I guess you are saying that CtP II had more programming fans than Civ does? I would inform you all that having a programmable AI would even *attract* programmers from the open source community.
2. Are you saying the CtP 2 AI is better than the one in Civ 3? In what way?
3. No. You need expert players to write better AI routines. Game-specific knowledge such as shortcuts and tricks are important.
Since it looks like Civ 4 is going to target causal gamers, I do not see how it is going to attract geeks.Originally posted by Drachasor
While I am not diminshing the value of the people at Firaxes, I think you are cutting the cIV community a more than a bit short.
Not that you are.Originally posted by Drachasor
With all due respect to Firaxas, it isn't like they are experts in the AI field.(\__/) 07/07/1937 - Never forget
(='.'=) "Claims demand evidence; extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
(")_(") "Starting the fire from within."Comment
-
That's not how it works.Originally posted by Drachasor
The point is that you don't need *one* person that can do better. Everyone in the community could be worse.
OSS has been working so far because somebody in the community is better. esr himself stated that OSS works best for software with a huge user base (e.g. OS) and worst for specialised software (e.g. AI routines for a TBS game).Originally posted by Drachasor
The benefit of the community approach is you have an entire pool of people to think about a problem; entire pool of people to be creative about it.; an entire pool of people to watch for errors; an entire pool of people to refine the program.(\__/) 07/07/1937 - Never forget
(='.'=) "Claims demand evidence; extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
(")_(") "Starting the fire from within."Comment
-
Sorry, I never ICS, and most of the time I win.Originally posted by nostromo
In other words, you either use ICS, or you lose.Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento MoriComment
-
I hope they'll come with an open source editor, so that the big mouths here on poly will find out how hard it is to script a good AI.Originally posted by Enigma_Nova
It would ROCK to have open-source, editable AI. Then we might have a chance of fighting a real opponent that doesn't take 24 hours to calculate its moves.
Most of the wannabe AI-programmers will find out that when the AI finally behaves they want on situation X, the AI will behave really really ackwards in situation A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M.....etc...
you get the point
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento MoriComment
-
You're agreeing with me, Cyber?
How dare you!
(\__/) 07/07/1937 - Never forget
(='.'=) "Claims demand evidence; extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
(")_(") "Starting the fire from within."Comment
-
Yeah, now you must agree with me on the topic of the Bible, otherwise the standing won't be equalOriginally posted by Urban Ranger
You're agreeing with me, Cyber?
How dare you!
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento MoriComment
-
I wonder who voted in this poll. Most likely single players. The quest to improve the AI is a lost cause. I say they should better fix the combat and allow us MP players to enjoy the game. The AI, no matter how "good" it is programmed, is prone to flaws in design and hence human exploitation. So, if you want a full gaming experience, you should find a human opponent and try to beat him.
Actually they did a very good job with AI cheating and bonus in production. It's a far, far better way to improve the AI chances than to try and make it smart.Comment
-
Most likely, since most of the people who play Civ do so in single player most of the time.Originally posted by Ljube-ljcvetko
I wonder who voted in this poll. Most likely single players.Comment
-
Ehh, I'll agree to disagree for now. I could continue the debate on the community improve the given AI, but it clearly isn't going anywhere, and it won't go anywhere.
We'll see what happens, and if I am wrong, then I'll own up to my error.
-Drachasor"If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for her prescription and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandmother. If there's an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties. It's that fundamental belief -- I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper -- that makes this country work." - Barack ObamaComment
Comment