Better AI or more features?

[Adalbertus]

In the series Civ1 - Civ2 - SMAC(X) - Civ3 (CtP2 as a bad joke, haven't played CivCtP) I got the impression that up to SMAC(X) the possibilities for the player increased, and the AI got correspondingly weaker. Civ3 seems to counteract not by telling the AI how to exploit more of the game mechanics but by limiting the possibilities of the (human) player. This automatically makes the AI tougher. As to my part I enjoy the wealth of possibilities of SMAC(X), and regret the step back in Civ3 (for me, it plays almost like Civ1).
It is quite easy to implement features into the game. But it is much harder and consumes more time and ressources to teach the AI how to use them. It would be even more difficult to implement an AI which is able to learn new tricks in the game, given the rules.

So, for a forseeable future, I think we (or the game producers) are left with the choice to either have a strong AI or to have a vast variety of possibilities and strategies in the game, with a relatively weak AI (at least if the AI doesn't cheat one or the other way). Personally, I would definitely choose the latter possibility of more flexibility. The problem of the weak AI could be alleviated by offering a flexible programming interface (the only good innovation by CtP2).

[Thrawn05]

SHOW ME THE SOURCE CODE!!!

[Dis]

and alleviate the problem with multiplayer

yes more features and options is what we want.

what good is a challenging ai if we are bored of the game?

[The Thinker]

I want a better AI. I'm not that good of a player, don't plan very far ahead sometimes. The computer players should be able to chalenge me simply by banding together when the time is right, and turning on each other when it's not. Instead the AI has to treat the human player differently from the other nations. What it would sell to one nation for 20 gold it wants 2000 gold from me. Really what I want is better AI and an Editor so we can make changes.

Rik

[Pius Popprasch]

I always like a good non-cheating A.I. I can miss some features instead. I don't like that the rules get adapted to help the A.I., though(e.g. game +2food).

[Adagio]

A better AI!!!

I don't want the AI to get most more tougher, but I want the AI to be more wiser, this means when I'm ordering the AI to get off my land they need to do it the fastests way, not walking straight through my empire when I ordered their units out as they were standing just next to the borders to their country. I also want the AI to better at diplomacy, so they don't want 10 new techs for a territory map

When these things have been changed the game will be almost perfect.

[Jac de Molay]

Voted for features because im new to civ 3 and the ai gives me enough to handle, but the poll choices seem rather self-limiting.

Dave

[Alex]

Definitely more features. Even if this weakens the AI. The game is supposed to be fun, and if you want a challenge you go for multiplayer.

Oh, there is no multiplayer in Civ3 (yet)...

[Adalbertus]

Lots of programmers around. Have you already joined FreeAC or FreeCiv?

but the poll choices seem rather self-limiting.

I limited the poll to three questions, because there are normally four possibilities when you have two supposedly independent alternatives. One I omitted because I seriously doubt that anyone wants limited features with a bad AI. Of course anyone wants to have a good AI and many features. But say, we adopt the point of view of Firaxis/Infogrames who, be it true or not, say that they did do the best they could do given the time frame, which in turn is dictated by money. In this case they have do decide between features and an AI which is able to use all existing features. And I got the impression over the last two or three years that it is not only the Civ series where the quality of the artwork improved but the quality of AI/design/code suffered.
IMHO it is the most difficult part of a strategy game to construct a good AI - Even if artwork is more time consuming. But at some point, the artwork is done while it is always possible to improve the AI.
I left the last option to those who are confident they can do a better job than Firaxis, and still be in time for the release.

So, as there are as many voters for many features (who should be more happy with SMAC) and a tough AI (who should more like Civ3) -- given a certain budget for the development of the games, it might be best to finish the Civ3 editor and make a Civ mod for SMAC and a SMAC mod for Civ3, and everybody should be as happy as possible

[Galahadba]

Best ai, couse the ai of civ3 is stupid at any level of dificult, the only dificult of the game is that the ai always trade tecnology one with other , sometimes for les than 10 GP and that they have production vantages at deity level

the ai is so weak that in a game i was with 15 mounted warrior in a square adjacent to a aztec city (i don't remember the name) , in the computers turn they pass at my side with 4 spearman, and 8 arquers without atack me i think that they was going to atack one of my cities, the problem was that they have left only 2(!) spearmens to defend the city against my 15 mounted warriors.... ....this kind of thing that make me stop to play sometimes....

i think that if they improve the ai the game will be much better...

[exeter0]

Yes.. Yes... Better AI please. But don't worry about it Firaxis.. you just give us more features, and an API like CTP2... and let us worry about the AI!

(This comment is a bit harsh... but practical )

[The Andy-Man]

i never played CTP2, but since i found out how editorable it is and how cool the mods for it look, I WANT IT. but know where has it. is it downloadable yet?

anywho, more features and stratergies is best. then the AI develops around that, so a tough strat is tough with a bad or good AI.

[thinkingamer]

more features, such as MP, and good manual that lets u understand everything there is to customize ur ultimate civ!

[Leonidas]

Make the game open-ended and customizable, and the creative abilities of the modders will do the rest. . .

[Mark_Everson]

My vote was for strong AI and fewer features. I am a programmer, and think I can do a much better job than the commercial AIs, but Not as fast. Doing it according to a commercial game schedule is a big part of the problem IMO. Once the rules are nailed down there just isn't much time for good AI...

I have no faith in the commercial houses putting out an AI API that is versatile and deep enough to allow for really good AI. Of course worthwhile improvements at the margins are possible, and should be encouraged, but a breakthrough AI that many of us want won't come from this path IMO.

If anyone would like to check out some admittedly long discussions on the AI for Clash of Civilizations, I'd like to hear what you think. Its in AI -- the thread . If you want to cut to the chase skip to my summary post about the next steps for our AI starting in my post of 13-02-2002 22:56 in that thread.