Civ III AI - This explains everything (at least to me)

[BillChin]

Snipped from:

http://apolyton.net/misc/column/204_sidsoren.shtml

AI
-----------------------------
Soren was in charge of the AI and it took "7 or 8 months of his time to write it about half writing and then half testing." He'd set the AI to play against itself for ten minutes, and then rewrite as necc. He also tried playing against it himself, of course.

----
>>>

With this methodology, I can see how and why the AI is what it is. With only 4 months to do coding, I believe it is a minor miracle that the AI is as good as it is and a testament to the brilliance of the programmer. (Good in the sense that it can beat 20% of players on a level playing field.) Sure the AI does stupid things, but with one person coding and one person testing, many loopholes will never be found. Also there is the phenomenon that fixing one stupid behavior often leads to another, even more stupid behavior.

I am sure there was a lot more nipping and tucking after the primary engine was written, but the die was cast. It seems like it is too bad that an experienced gamer was not in the early AI development loop for testing and for ideas. Mr. Johnson may be a brilliant programmer, but I doubt he is in the top 20% of Civ III players or any 4x type game. (More likely the top 40% or top 50%.) Having a top flight Civ II player involved early, probably would have been a tremendous resource for Mr. Johnson.

My compliments to Mr. Johnson for coding the Civ III AI with what I see as limited time and resources.

Cheers.

[Coracle]

That stupid AI

". . . only four months to do coding". With just one person doing it.

And no doubt a deadline to get it marketed in time for the Holday buying season.

RUSHED TO MARkET AND INCOMPLETE.

The AI is INADEQUATE, TOO.

[Jon Shafer]

Before another whine-fest, ala "civ 3 sucks" starts up again, I point you all to this, originally posted in the very top thread...

#151 HOW AND WHY DO BAD GAMES GET MADE AND PUBLISHED

http://apolyton.net/misc/column/151_bad.shtml

by Ex-Activisioner David "Pyaray" Ray

While the game has certanily been dumbed down so that it will appeal to a more mass audience, most of the bugs and deficiencies of the game aren't due to Firaxis.

[Akka]

Only four months for coding, alone, the AI of a game like Civ3 is in my opinion a proof of competence for Soren.
I don't like the design decision over the AI, but the result is very good, and it's even better when I think he did it alone.
Just thinking about the work it is to write 70 000 lines of code concerning an AI and find the bugs in it makes me dizzy

Congrats, Soren

[Theseus]

A couple of years ago I participated in starting a dotcom for commercial real estate.

We ended up with about 140,000 lines of code for the site.

We paid $15+ million to a third-party developer to do this, as well as funding our own tech staff (and it sucked, btw). Also btw, it wasn't my call... I won;t pay more than 100 gps for gems, being the cheapskate and warmongerer that I am.

Admittedly, those were crazy days, but whatever Firaxis did, with Soren and any other resources, I am impressed.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Coracle
The AI is INADEQUATE, TOO.

It's inadequately stupid? As in, not as stupid as the Civ2 AI? Do you like it that way?

Or do you mean inadequate in comparison to a human player, in which case your naivite boggles the mind. Do you really think any mere game company has an AI that matches a human? Dream on, my friend...

And, if you want to play with humans, there's an XP with your name on it coming out soon.

So what do you have to complain about?

Just once, Coracle, I challenge you to answer and have a discussion with me. Can you back up your complaining?

[ACooper]

Originally posted by cyclotron7


It's inadequately stupid? As in, not as stupid as the Civ2 AI? Do you like it that way?

Or do you mean inadequate in comparison to a human player, in which case your naivite boggles the mind. Do you really think any mere game company has an AI that matches a human? Dream on, my friend...

And, if you want to play with humans, there's an XP with your name on it coming out soon.

So what do you have to complain about?

Just once, Coracle, I challenge you to answer and have a discussion with me. Can you back up your complaining?

Give it up. Coracle won't answer. He know he stands on shaky ground at best.

On topic: The time frame for coding this AI is incredible. I'm sure that it was 7-8 months of long hours and bad take out food. I think Soren should be aplauded for the work he has done. Civ 3 has the best AI of any other game in the genre.

Good job Soren. Thank you for all your efforts.

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by ACooper
Good job Soren. Thank you for all your efforts.

Hear hear.

Make sure they, uh, "reward" you with the AI for Civ IV too. Just make sure they give you twice as long next time.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Trip

Hear hear.

Make sure they, uh, "reward" you with the AI for Civ IV too. Just make sure they give you twice as long next time.

And maybe somebody to just playtest the AI that he writes.


P.S. Stop trying to challenge Coracle everyone. He won't expound on his statements. And, for sure, he won't play MP. Because he can't cheat.

[Dominae]

Re: Civ III AI - This explains everything (at least to me)

Originally posted by BillChin
It seems like it is too bad that an experienced gamer was not in the early AI development loop for testing and for ideas. Mr. Johnson may be a brilliant programmer, but I doubt he is in the top 20% of Civ III players or any 4x type game. (More likely the top 40% or top 50%.) Having a top flight Civ II player involved early, probably would have been a tremendous resource for Mr. Johnson.

I see no evidence to support this. To create an AI that plays the game as well as it does requires intimate knowledge of all things Civ. I find it hard to imagine that Soren isn't in the top 1% of all Civ players, if you want to look at it that way. People who "write the book" on any topic are invariably experts.


Dominae

[Switch]

Originally posted by cyclotron7
Or do you mean inadequate in comparison to a human player, in which case your naivite boggles the mind. Do you really think any mere game company has an AI that matches a human? Dream on, my friend...

Any mere game company? Try any company, ever. Does anyone think anyone'll develop AI that even comes close to human behaviour? IMO, no. Our brains are just too complex, and then there's the added problem of dynamic personalities, forgetfullnes, moral fibres, and the soul. No, it's just too much for our small in comprehension yet high in complexity brains

[Theseus]

1. SwitchMo0: Within 20 years, bank on it.

2. As I am sure is true for most here, I have been a gameplayer all of my life. My feeling is that people can admire or complain all that they want, but the proof is in MP, whether that's over the Internet or across a table. My standing response to Coracle, and others like him / her who argue without true engagement and dialectic: Let's talk when I have 100 Tanks on your doorstep, or vice versa. After all, warfare is a tool of politics.

[Dominae]

Well said Theseus. MP will cull the weak.


Dominae

[Capt Dizle]

cyclotron7,

Not to answer for anyone else but here is my take on it. AI has never being developed to the point that it should be the centerpiece of a computer game. Chess maybe, but not something like Civ.

After playing a few games of Civ3 I pretty well have an idea of what the AI could do. At this point, I was looking for something else to keep my interest and could not find it. I will admit that Civ3 AI is much better than SMAC AI. But it does not matter.

Lets suppose you have two unintelligent people. One has an IQ of 54. Moron. Other is 90. Sub-average. If you are looking for a quick wit both are lacking, only one is more obvious than the other. At the end of the day it does not matter.

With SMAC, there were tons of things in the game to be interested in. Features. Add in MP and they really shine.

Irregardless of how technically proficient Soren is he was doomed on day one because of the decision to showcase the AI. AI is the weakest part of computer gaming and when you decide to showcase a weakness you have already made a fatal blunder.

Someday maybe AI will be capable of learning and evolving. This is not that day.

Besides, take your average game of Civ with one human and seven AI. If the AI was equal to the human, the human would only win one in eight tries. If that were the case very few would play.

Make it fun first, deep second, and a challenge if you have spare development time cause all of your bugs are fixed.

[Capt Dizle]

BTW, if any of you want to make statements about me and MP, you better just check me out. I can play. I can compete at the highest level.
I am just not sold that Civ3 MP is up to my standards.



jt