Future AI

[The Badger]

I tried D&D Online;

And many of the players I met and played with were adults who had fled the WOW crowd -
I htink the Manga/Comic fantasy of WoW appeals to the RASalvatore fan base -

unfortunately for 'grittier' gamers such as myself; the company chose their most warcraft-like (steam technology; cannons; magically created automatons) and ended up appealing to the same fanbase.
Then they increasing changed D%D rules to please the MMO's -ers -
which to me was like trying to out-pizza pizza.


many a spiel i threw about the DROW escaping to haunt me there too-
above ground no less...

Sigh.

Anyway;interestingly; I noticed the AI at DDO was also under constat discussion.
In my opinion it was fine for running aggressive brutes & minions-
not so much anything with ANY sense.

I even asked for a "looking for boss" feature (main villain played by a human player)and generated no interest

The nifty thing to me about STW was it INNOVATED. It was the game that was what some many of us had waited for...

The thing I think is that if there are more variation in the AI strategies

so a pizza guy script...
a "not -so -zerg" script...

...it would be more likely to hand down surprises - whats worse than a bad AI?

a predictable ai.

In closing; I'd like to have you taste test this...
Its not a pizza and i'm not a Dismounted English Chef however

Notice the survey asks if we want a multiplayer campaign?

What if the current campaigns you could use your internet connection to throw on -whichever gamespy, xfire whatever- a "boss wanted"- game
- a game joinable by a human player to run the battlein your campaign.

eligibilty based on score/ranking allows the player to join only generals of rank "x"..
maybe you're not in the mood for a full game but want to play a single battle? you get on and the list of games has a list of campaign battles "looking for boss" (enemy generals really)

..that i suggest due to relative ease.

Its not a campaign fix BUT it would be interesting no?

My main point i suppose is all these discussions about the AI always make me say - even tho this ISNT an MMO precisely -
that we could very well make use of the EXISTING intelligence all around us-
quite a commodity to not utilize...

[Durallan]

I really do like the Civilizations 4 AI and it can be quite challenging or sneaky at times, and each leader has different personalities and so I don't see why they can't build as complex an AI thats in civ 4.

[Didz]

Due to my son monopolizing my MTW2 disk on his PC, I have gone back to playing RTW and was surprised to find that its AI is giving me much more of a run for my money.

I have lost several Gallic towns to AI led seige assaults and even lost a few battles. The overall score is still 107/28 but thats a lot better than anything the AI has managed on MTW2.

[The Badger]

Well...

To be honest; I no longer play England b/c altho the 'patched' AI is a little better about using fleets to invade; it just never put me in any real danger.

The King of Portugal did land near Wales... ALONE..
which i found inexplicable-
but never were the home Islands in any real danger -

being able to attack without fear of reprisal simply made the campaign too easy.

If its any consolation; when i played Sicily; in the mediterrean the AI was at least occaisionally harassing me if i let my garrisons grow too weak.

So i assume it was an opportunist; and not capable of the several-turns long course of action that would be required for anyone other than france to pressure me.

I'm sure the multiple 'personality' AI was intended; I just don't see that it is
actually implemented.

[Patriote]

I just finish reading all the posts and I must admit this is a really interesting conversation. I thought about it myself a little bit, and because AIs are most of time incapable of giving a challenge for the wits of players, one way game designers use to "improved" it (that I totaly hate) is to give the Ai unrealistic bonuses. (Like in Napoleon's Last Battle, having 4 of my Elite Battalions of the Young Guard defeated, in a direct firefight, by 3 Landwher Battalions only to find out at the end of the battle that the Landwher Battalions lost only 10 men together)

Any who played STW and MTW might remember a feature which disappeared with TRW. It was the possibility, before the start of the battle, to choose a formation for your whole army with a simple click ( you simply had to right-click on the Army Formation Icon and then choose a formation. You could then tried as many as you wanted until you found one that suited you)

With that feature reimplanted, it would be easy if associated with "general" personalities for family members and even captains (aggressive, balanced, defensive; frontal assault, cautious, indirect, those are taken from the Gethysburger game) also taking into account who's being the defender and the attacker. to "ramdomise things and give interesting battlefield deployments for the AI (also adding one more reason to find the type of personalities your enemy has before engaging him)
Also, this would go well with many traits such as good attacker/defender ;poor attacker/defender, "bad at the walls(meaning the general might prefer to sally out) and could also lead to new ones, hidden or not, such as: lost last battle or won a "pyric" victory because of a frontal assault, this character now prefers a more cautious way of engaging the enemy.


But this is more Behavior Modification than Situational Awareness I admit. However, Ai does have limited Situational Awareness as shown in RTW by the fact that your battle advisor warns you from threats such as engaged cavalry being charged, sending cavalry to engage spearmen from the front and even engaging the enemy's best troops with your missile troops.
Maybe that could be modified and improved.
Like giving the AI a basic understanding of tactics for its whole army, not just specific units or events, such as the protection of its sides and rear, the importance of morale (keeping soldiers and units in formation, avoiding to move or charge units through others unless they are fleeing, all this to avoid confusion which used to reduce morale in STW) and the use and impact of terrain upon his battle plan and deployment (battle plan and deployment being mostly dictated by his personality)

Anyways, here some ideas to comment on and extrapolate from. Feel free to use them as you see fit.

[The Badger]

Any who played STW and MTW might remember a feature which disappeared with TRW. It was the possibility, before the start of the battle, to choose a formation for your whole army with a simple click ( you simply had to right-click on the Army Formation Icon and then choose a formation. You could then tried as many as you wanted until you found one that suited you)

With that feature reimplanted, it would be easy if associated with "general" personalities for family members and even captains (aggressive, balanced, defensive; frontal assault, cautious, indirect, those are taken from the Gethysburger game) ...

That was a very good point - and I'm willing to bet (relatively) easy to implement - and you're right so much of the battle ends up consequent of the start formation (AI tendency to 'shuffle' hill to hill not with standing...)

Patriote; could a small burrowing animal seek your indulgence to repost this in the 1.3 WishList thread?

[Patriote]

Patriote; could a small burrowing animal seek your indulgence to repost this in the 1.3 WishList thread?

No need to it The Badger, I will post myself a few ideas on the wishlist including a link to this thread, thats good enough for you ?

If you already post, thats ok too

[Didz]

Not sure if you guys are aware of this...I only became aware of it myself quite recently.

BUT:

MTW2 has the ability to remember and maintain any army formation you choose.

To set-up the formation you want just place your units where you want them during the deployment phase, or at any other point during the battle.

Once your troops are in the formaiton your want them to maintain merely press CTRL+A (to select all your units) then Press G (to group the entire army).

Now when you order your army to move all the units will keep their positions relative to each other. Its best when ordering the army to move to pause the game first as it sometimes takes several tries to get the armies destination perfectly lined up where you want to be.

Provided that the Army remains grouped all the units will stay perfectly aligned in their formation (as long as you don't order them to run, as units that can't run, like artillery, get left behind)

Note: Cavalry charges, skirmishers etc.

Some units will inevitably get out of formation during battle, either because you order them to charge or pursue, or because they are in skirmish mode and evade an attack.

However, as long as you keep the Group active the units will always remember their correct position in the formation and return to it when you move the army as a group.

If you wish to modify the formation e.g. to have your archers deploy behind your spearmen instead of in front, all you need to do is move the units where you want them cancel the group and press CTRL+A and G to store the revised army formation.

[Patriote]

Yes I knew it and this is a great feature to creature special formations such, as in RTW, forming a line with phalanxes but having lighter units facing to the side and one to the rear to protect so that the lighter troops will arrive there first, re-align themselves and wait until the slower phalanxes arrive ( great great)

However, we were rather talking about pre-determine formations as the Arrowhead, Crane and some others weird names I can't remeber. This would bring both realism and accuracy to the game if they would add historical formations ( limiting army to the formations they historically used) but also shorten the time required to deploy in your army (such in RTW when you have to do the chessboard formation everytime...) while giving the army nice and varied starting deployments (some people did great mods for the AI, at least in RTW as far as I know and it gives a good challenge)

[The Badger]

Thanks Didz
But yes i use that as well -
however the part that impressed me was the point he made that the PRESET formations (as in MTW) could be used by the AI

and that the "general personality" - a new trait?-
would influence the AI's choice of formations...

I know another modder already worked on AI placement variations -

and in another thread - or was it this one?-
it was discussed that multiple 'possible' AI "personalities" (scripts) would make the AI less predictable...

I think his suggestion was just a nicely elegant way to connect all those seemingly tangential discussions - using traits and an unfortunately forgotten feature.
( in other words not requiring some huge overhaul).