Game AI
I have been playing strategy games for a very long time now. Ever since the original civ1 was released. I have played every TBS known to man (and woman). I can categorically say that the AI in all these games has been woeful. Admittedly there is considerable variation, ranging from just plain woeful to truly abysmal.
The complexity of the thinking required simply does not match the AI tools that are available at present. My understanding is that a number of people are going to attempt to improve the AI.
Given the difficulty experienced by all games in this area the question must be asked whether there will be a sufficient pay-off for the effort expended. I have absolutely no doubt whatever that improvements can be achieved. What concerns me is that a huge effort could be made here for very little gain. And there is no way of knowing in advance what the likely gain will be.
Alternatives
An alternative approach is to add features to the game which will draw attention away from the inadequacies of the AI. I have already alluded to some of these in earlier posts but I will recap some of them here as well as suggest others.
* Make the AI aggressive and give it enough military units. Sure, it will still be dumb but at least the player will have a situation to deal with.
* Make gold tight and give the player options to deal with this.
* Make research slow but give the player ways of dealing with it. (On a side note, getting advances through conquest is just a bit too easy at present IMHO.)
* Introduce other concepts such Nationality, Religion, Supply and Mining Resources.
Some of these things will require a significant programming effort. The point is that they are more certain to give a suitable pay-off in terms of effort expended.
The AI, of course, will have to deal with these issues as well. But there's always DiffDb to help it out.
I am not suggesting that this entirely an "either - or" situation but rather one of priorities. Please accept my comments in good faith. I am painfully aware that I am not able to make a significant contribution in terms of what needs to be done.
I have been playing strategy games for a very long time now. Ever since the original civ1 was released. I have played every TBS known to man (and woman). I can categorically say that the AI in all these games has been woeful. Admittedly there is considerable variation, ranging from just plain woeful to truly abysmal.
The complexity of the thinking required simply does not match the AI tools that are available at present. My understanding is that a number of people are going to attempt to improve the AI.
Given the difficulty experienced by all games in this area the question must be asked whether there will be a sufficient pay-off for the effort expended. I have absolutely no doubt whatever that improvements can be achieved. What concerns me is that a huge effort could be made here for very little gain. And there is no way of knowing in advance what the likely gain will be.
Alternatives
An alternative approach is to add features to the game which will draw attention away from the inadequacies of the AI. I have already alluded to some of these in earlier posts but I will recap some of them here as well as suggest others.
* Make the AI aggressive and give it enough military units. Sure, it will still be dumb but at least the player will have a situation to deal with.
* Make gold tight and give the player options to deal with this.
* Make research slow but give the player ways of dealing with it. (On a side note, getting advances through conquest is just a bit too easy at present IMHO.)
* Introduce other concepts such Nationality, Religion, Supply and Mining Resources.
Some of these things will require a significant programming effort. The point is that they are more certain to give a suitable pay-off in terms of effort expended.
The AI, of course, will have to deal with these issues as well. But there's always DiffDb to help it out.
I am not suggesting that this entirely an "either - or" situation but rather one of priorities. Please accept my comments in good faith. I am painfully aware that I am not able to make a significant contribution in terms of what needs to be done.
Comment