AI in MOO3

[patrickjb53]

I think it hard designing AI's for most games. One problem is the diversity of the player’s abilities. Some players when they play on the 'Average' setting kick the computers butt, then other players like myself, get their butts kicked. So how does a game developer make a games AI so that everyone can enjoy the game. I believe by having many levels of difficulties, that a game can be made challenging for everyone (around 7 to 8 levels would be best).
Hopefully MOO3 has enough levels of difficulties to make it fun for everyone.

[raghar]

IG 1 was harder actualy. I played it on Hard and it was funny how easily I could win against big deadly computer's fleets. IG 2 was winnable on normal. It wasn't as much problem. 16 battleships? After they would attack 3 my planets they would be probably destroyed. AI was rather dumb. It was done by Hungarians IIRC, and they learned this: "if you'd wanna have good game, you must have goooood graphic." They are taught that on their schools. They concentrated so much on graphic so they forgot game behaviour.
I would not write how can you abuse AI in IG2, now. I'd be rather happy if you'd find some mistakes you did and win it without abuse of AI. From what you said, I think you were rather slow, or you didn't protected opponents of your biggest enemy. How many planets have you own? And how many planets did you take from enemy?

reinsatlled

It must be really hard torture to...

[raghar]

Originally posted by Grumbold
If it has the jump on you just keep it capturing the same planets over and over by recapturing them once the enemy megafleet has moved elsewhere. Once you can build 3 of the best fortresses on your main planets you're pretty safe even if his fleets are overwhelming.

It depends on game. How many fortreses could be build on planet? IIRC i had 4 and they was destroyed.

[Kc7mxo]

I dunno why Kc. I won the game on normal as all 3 races without huge difficulties both times I played through after an initial learning game. All I did was expand as fast as possible both in size and in technological development.

I dunno. I kept trying, and I'd ussually wipe out one or two races, but eventually I'd meet one that would just annilate me. But playing on easy, was absolutely pathetic. I never did try playing on hard though. So I dunno. For me, IG2 on normal was helluva harder than moo2 on impossible, and exponentially harder than civ2 on deity.

And fortresses? What are you talking about? My fortresses were ALWAYS getting smashed as far as I can remember. After my first couple games I stopped building them because they were the first things to get blown up.

Its been a while since I played IG2 though. Last time I tried it wouldn't run with my new video card. Just kept bombing out to desktop.

[ammt603]

In GalCiv the AI isn't supposed to gang up on the person who's winning. Has anyone heard anything on how the AI in MOO3 deals with the winning player?

[Harry Seldon]

In GalCiv the AI isn't supposed to gang up on the person who's winning.

That's not entirely true. If the AI can ally itself with another civ and challenge the leading power it will do so. That means it will with you, too, if you're not the powerhouse of the region. If the AI can't find anyone to ally itself with for whatever reason, it will surrender when losing becomes inevitable.

[ammt603]

Originally posted by Harry Seldon


That's not entirely true. If the AI can ally itself with another civ and challenge the leading power it will do so. That means it will with you, too, if you're not the powerhouse of the region. If the AI can't find anyone to ally itself with for whatever reason, it will surrender when losing becomes inevitable.

True. What i meant was, in the words of Draginol- "If you are winning the game, your friends remain your friends. In fact, they may want to move beyond friends and become your allies." I'm sure non-friendly AI civs will still try to gang up on you and kick your butt though.

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by raghar

It depends on game. How many fortreses could be build on planet? IIRC i had 4 and they was destroyed.

If you build your heavy fortresses inside your cities so that the tanks have to drive down your roads to get to them then it splits the attackers firepower. If you have 3 fortresses next to each other they ought to inflict major damage on the attacking force even if they get destroyed. After 2 or 3 successes the fleet will have to go home to get more tanks. You recapture your planets cheaply before the enemy defenses are built and rebuild the fortresses. Meanwhile your fleet is capturing and holding their worlds...

If the enemy fleet is huge you may have to force all ground battles to be played instead of autoresolving. The autocalc gives the attacker too much of an advantage that they dont get when its fought out.

[Kc7mxo]

If you build your heavy fortresses inside your cities so that the tanks have to drive down your roads to get to them then it splits the attackers firepower. If you have 3 fortresses next to each other they ought to inflict major damage on the attacking force even if they get destroyed. After 2 or 3 successes the fleet will have to go home to get more tanks. You recapture your planets cheaply before the enemy defenses are built and rebuild the fortresses. Meanwhile your fleet is capturing and holding their worlds...

If the enemy fleet is huge you may have to force all ground battles to be played instead of autoresolving. The autocalc gives the attacker too much of an advantage that they dont get when its fought out.

Oh, ground fortresses. I thought you meant space fortresses. My starbases seemed to be the first thing to go everytime.

I always had numerous fortresses barricaded in the cities, with the enemy forced to come to them. But eventually the AI would get orbital bombardment, and that would basically be the end of their usefullness.

[Stuie]

Originally posted by ammt603
In GalCiv the AI isn't supposed to gang up on the person who's winning. Has anyone heard anything on how the AI in MOO3 deals with the winning player?

Dogpile, especially if it's the human. Quote from a BT:

If the AI thinks you are going to win (or on the path to winning) it will declare war on you. The AI wants to destroy human players above all else.

Source:

http://www.orionsector.com/pages/faq/askbetas.shtml

About a third of the way down in a comment from "Lore Weaver". Sounds discouraging. I want diplomacy that makes sense, not a manufactured challenge just because I'm "winning". But, we'll have to see how it plays out.

[Kc7mxo]

About a third of the way down in a comment from "Lore Weaver". Sounds discouraging. I want diplomacy that makes sense, not a manufactured challenge just because I'm "winning". But, we'll have to see how it plays out.

Yeah, I prefer to play games like this for fun, not to win. And when it becomes obvious I'm going to win, I ussually just start over.

[Grumbold]

One betatester makes a comment so it must be true....

Some people have the sort of playing style that makes the AI's dogpile them in any game. Of course thats the Ai's fault, not theirs for being useless at politics, assuming they even bother with it. I just love the "I'm the biggest baddest dude, everyone should fear and respect me" attitude of some players. You only have to look round the world now to see all the smaller players scurrying to get nukes and biologicals to increase their leverage while indulging in brinksmanship of the highest calibre to avoid getting crushed.

[Kc7mxo]

"I'm the biggest baddest dude, everyone should fear and respect me" attitude of some players.

ANd if you take this attitude, then the AI should dislike you. But if you're right, then they should also fear you.

But if you don't take this attitude, but just happen to be strong, I don't think the AI should suddenly break your alliances and sneak attack you without any reason.

[niteshade6]

"But if you don't take this attitude, but just happen to be strong, I don't think the AI should suddenly break your alliances and sneak attack you without any reason."

Well I'm not sure I agree there. Quite often the AI will do it's best to simulate a human player, and human players will certainly be inclined to attack somebody they think is about to win. Alliances will help somewhat, but ultimately most alliances don't last if your about to lose the game because of them.

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Grumbold
One betatester makes a comment so it must be true....

Like I said, we'll have to see how it plays out. Yes, it's the only indication of dogpiling that I've seen, but then again, he's one of the few who actually have the game.

I'm still caustiously optimistic about this game. I just hope that the late game diplomacy isn't a step back rather than a step forward (genre-wise). Irrational dogpiling sucks.