Investigation of AI reassessment upon reload

[roguebolo]

Simetrical:

Right. Exactly. I think the same thing. As I pointed out earlier, software random number generators are not truly random -- they will produce the same sequence with the same seed. (A timer tic can be used as a seed to introduce more randomness, but the sequence will still eventually repeat itself.) Apparently you're familiar with these concepts. I was comparing it to a random number generator because I think that partially explains the phenomenon -- if the list of possible choices were enumerated, it would seem to always start with the same choice after a load.

We know in advance that it does not have an enumerated list of available, equally viable options for different situations. The reassessment process must construct such a list...and whether it is doing so using recursion, or techniques of combinatorial optimization, or whatever...further complicated by a rule-based heirarchy, topological relationships, and so forth...well, as you can see the end result is a heurism. In the long run, all AI boils down to that, especially with a game as complex as RTW.

I've asked once before if anyone was aware of other triggers which might cause a reassessment. One can assume that they would result in another possible decision-change on the part of the AI midturn (to use the random number example, the next number in the sequence without changing the seed), which would explain why user interaction can change the results of the "sanitized" 20-turn test.

I agree with roguebolo that this isn't really a bug. That the AI does reassess its move on reload isn't a bug; it's intended. That it reassesses it poorly is not a bug, it's a flaw or a problem. Bad AI does not constitute a bug. However, this is a matter of semantics that doesn't really need to be discussed further on this thread.

I think it's a matter of semantics also, and I also think it should be dropped. However, I still question the veracity of the statement that it is "poor AI."

HarunTaiwan:

The establishment of alliances will have the most dominant effect on the factions nearest to you and the ones that are bordering them. However, by establishing alliances with distant factions you can still have some control over events on the far end of the map. I generally do both. Is it really going to matter to you who is the strongest faction you have to fight when you expand toward Rome and have to fight Carthage, or the Scipii, or the Brutii, or the Greek Cities? Or some combination thereof?