What is wrong with the AI?

[Wikd Thots]

Now that I have you here I have a question. All of you people who jump into these threads because you know everything that is wrong with the AI.

What happened to the AI mods? Why aren't there any improved AI mods? Make a mod for the Kikass Nation. If the AI uses ****ty infantry then don't give it that infantry. If it uses ****ty pretenders then don't give it those pretenders. Or set the god and the scales and the everything so that the AI can not make stupid mistakes. I am not interested in new nations for ME to play. At least not yet. I do not want mods that add a balanced nation. I want one that is WAY unbalanced. But in ways that the AI will make use of. To hear some of you people all it would take is to trim some units and pretenders from Ulm to give us a challenge somewhere between now and mp.
NO I do not want to hear that mp is the answer.

[VedalkenBear]

Hm. Well, something that you would have to do in addition to restricting national troops/pretenders/etc. would be to remove the independents almost entirely as a recruitable resource. (As I recall, this mod exists.) This would force the AI to spend its money on its national troops etc.

If it's something as simple as trimming the recruitable lists, then that's something people should be able to do on an individual basis, y'know?

[Edi]

Actually, the NI (No Independents) games are not mod-dependent, but map dependent. So you need to have a map version that is modified to NI status by assigning empty poptypes to all provinces.

[Sombre]

What's with people asking "why are there no mods doing X?" or "why hasn't someone done Y yet?". Why does it always have to be someone else doing what you want done?

When it comes to modding Dom3 unless you're proposing lots of new units with new graphics and whatnot then you could actually have a go at doing it yourself; it's not that hard.

Not trying to be rude, but it seems like there are a lot more people talking about what they want 'someone' to do than actually giving constructive feedback on the many excellent mods that are already out there.

[HoneyBadger]

It's too bad you can't just make independents non-recruitable for the AI as an internal function of the game.

[Morkilus]

Some people also set up a couple nations with good scales and pretenders and then "set to AI". This would get around that complaint. Combine that with the No Indies maps, set independent strength less than 9, 16 Impossible AI's, and a medium size map should give you some challenge.

[Arralen]

@ HoneyBodger
You can - in some sort. Simply set the ressource cost to 100 for all indie troops, and they will very seldomly be build. Or to 999 ...
(Haven't checked, though, if the AI might stupidly keep adding them to the build queue every turn nevertheless. But I think it will not, as it builds troops from turn to turn..)


@ all the .. ehem .. critics

O.c. you could do a AI-version of every nation, to make it build the best troops etc only. Simply remove everthing else from the recruitment list. If you want that.

DO IT - YOURSELF!

I'm not going to do it. I have other interest if I'm doing a mod, and I spend way to many hours on my "Black Steel of Ulm" to make it interesting to play etc anyway.

[Foodstamp]

Wikd Thots said:
Now that I have you here I have a question. All of you people who jump into these threads because you know everything that is wrong with the AI.

What happened to the AI mods? Why aren't there any improved AI mods? Make a mod for the Kikass Nation. If the AI uses ****ty infantry then don't give it that infantry. If it uses ****ty pretenders then don't give it those pretenders. Or set the god and the scales and the everything so that the AI can not make stupid mistakes. I am not interested in new nations for ME to play. At least not yet. I do not want mods that add a balanced nation. I want one that is WAY unbalanced. But in ways that the AI will make use of. To hear some of you people all it would take is to trim some units and pretenders from Ulm to give us a challenge somewhere between now and mp.
NO I do not want to hear that mp is the answer.



Do YOU have fingers and toes? Do YOU have a working computer? If so, act now and you can create this mod yourself! Would be excellent to see a mod that makes the AI a bit more challenging, but I am not going to mod it, because I know I would lose interest in doing the mod after about 15 minutes.

So to answer the question of why no one has made this mod for you. It's not that we are dense, it is that the modding community likes to make mods that are interesting enough to keep our attention. There are a few modders out there that like doing rule changes rather than adding new material. You may try to collaborate with them or ask them for advice as you create this mod. I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

[HoneyBadger]

It's a nice mod, Arralen. I've got the world's worst head-cold or I'd give you some positive feedback. As it is, I feel like I'm a couple miles underneath a really vindictive ocean.

[Shovah32]

The problem is that when you set a nation to ai its only on normal difficulty.

[Ironhawk]

Wikd Thots said:
NO I do not want to hear that mp is the answer.



MP is the answer. Hahahahha!!! Seriously tho, if you are looking for a real challenge, it is.

But your idea is not without merit. The key to producing a Competitive AI Nation tho would be a solid understanding of how the AI chooses units to recruit. If JK or KO could give us insight into this, it would not be terribly difficult to construct a nation in such a way that the AI recruits reasonably.

[Wikd Thots]

Hey! It isn't ME saying that I know exactly what the AI is doing wrong. Some people here get very specific on what units the AI should stop using. So I am asking why THOSE people can't put their expertise into a mod for us. It isn't a put up or shut up thing. I just don't want to put one together and then hear from those people about all of the things I did wrong with it.

And for the same reason I do not really feel like jumping from stupid AI directly into mp.

Is independents such a horrible mistake for the AI? I would rather just play on a smaller map than play without the independents.

[Foodstamp]

Wikd, if you can get the information compiled on the AI and how it reacts to situations, it's recruiting habits and so forth, I will help guide you through making the mod.

As far as the leap from AI to MP goes, take it. It gives you a new out look on the game. It teaches you what spells are really valuable and it helps you develop a better late game strategy (Although I still suck at this part, too much micromanagement QQ).

You will find that 99% of the time, no one is going to be critical of your performance in MP. It's a lot different than counterstrike. Besides, it is just a game.

[Actuarian]

Wikd Thots said:
Now that I have you here I have a question. All of you people who jump into these threads because you know everything that is wrong with the AI.

What happened to the AI mods? Why aren't there any improved AI mods? Make a mod for the Kikass Nation. If the AI uses ****ty infantry then don't give it that infantry. If it uses ****ty pretenders then don't give it those pretenders. Or set the god and the scales and the everything so that the AI can not make stupid mistakes. I am not interested in new nations for ME to play. At least not yet. I do not want mods that add a balanced nation. I want one that is WAY unbalanced. But in ways that the AI will make use of. To hear some of you people all it would take is to trim some units and pretenders from Ulm to give us a challenge somewhere between now and mp.
NO I do not want to hear that mp is the answer.



The problem is not that the AI is too stupid, it's that you're too smart. I suggest taking some mind altering drugs that temporarally lower your intelligence. That should level the playing field.

Either that or mp, because it sounds like you want an AI that thinks like a human.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Seriously, I've only played a few multi-player games, but that is by far the best way to learn the game's complexities, and I haven't been made to feel humiliated yet.

[Manuk]

Is there a better challenge than MP?
And if you play by TCPIP or Mail You can play your turns whenever you want. Since this is not an online game.
Personally I get convinced if some spell or unit is good when it works against me. That´s the ultimate testimony.

[Wikd Thots]

What part of "NO I do not want to hear that mp is the answer" do you people not understand? I HAVE played MP! I know what it is good for. And I plan to play it much more.

But I want to experiment with tactics and things without quitting an mp game as soon as I figure out that it was a bust. Or hear from the experts here "why did you do that"? I've seen some of the comments here and I don't care to play with some people until I have had a chance to experiment some more. The only alternative seems to be to listen to the trashers and do whatever they say is best.

And as far as "why not do it yourself" that seems to be taking the direction that I myself thought it would be NICER for ME not to say. I tried to avoid the direction of "if it is so easy and if you know the answers then shut up and fix it". Some people here seem quick to trash the game AND seem to have the ability to do mods. Since I am not trashing the game then I don't think that I am the one who needs to do the mod.

[VedalkenBear]

Well, your initial post was quite... ambiguous as to your position. That is why so many people have responded as they did.

And, well, don't call for a mod (especially one that can be tested for general feasibiliy so easily) without expecting the response of 'do it yourself'.

Here, why don't you do this? Get the map that has no poptypes on the independents, and see if the AI can do what you want. If it can, great, you have your own answer. If it can't, then you need to do some basic modding to remove some 'bad units' from a nation or two, assign the AI to the modified nations, and then see if _that_ does what you want. If it doesn't, then it might not be doable. Or you may need to refine what you think 'bad' is.

[Ironhawk]

No, I responded as I did just to antagonize you. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Only in jest tho, of course. I understand that some people prefer SP. I even play SP myself from time to time (tho not in dominions).

[UncleYee]

Passing no judgment upon, and indeed not trying to unravel, the OP's point, I'd like to add a perspective to the "MP is the answer" line of reasoning. As an SP player who's starting to appreciate the failings of the AI, I do wish I could play against more challenging opponents.

Yet MP is such a totally different gaming experience, as I assume MP vets know very well. Perhaps, though, folks fail to fully think out _why_ and _how_ MP is so different. If a critique of the AI is to be answered by a suggestion to play MP, the implication is that playing MP is like playing against AIs, only smarter. I hope it is obvious that this is not the case. MP, if I understand correctly, is a far more social experience. It is one that involves interacting with other people to a great degree, and this interaction fundamentally (this can't be emphasized enough) changes the gameplay experience.

To put it another way, all will agree that comparing SP to MP strategies is apples to oranges, but few iterate that the difference in your opponent's tactical and strategic competence is arguably less fundamental to that change than the gameplay shift from private game to social game.

I just bring this up so that MP folks will keep in mind that while some of us might actually relish the challenge of gameplay against more competent opponents, opponents who play as well as those in this bountiful community of MP, none the less many SP gamers are just SP gamers. I don't sit in my room playing video games for hours on end because I get a kick out of interacting with other people. I mean, isn't that obvious?

I hope you'll appreciate the spirit in which this is meant. I love these boards, I love that there's a thriving community for this game, and I love the interaction here, the talking about ideas and strategies and whatnot. And yet, I don't want to play MP. It's just not the kind of playing I enjoy. I don't want to make alliances and gang up or get ganged-up on, I don't want to trade mages with hellbind heart (man that's clever), and I don't want to be a loser online the way I am off. I dont want to try and have more friends than everybody else, because I'm just lousy at making friends. Again, that's all wrapped up in my compulsive videogame playing. Chicken or egg, I couldn't tell you.

OK, I just wanted to chime in with that perspective. I think discussions on improving the AI are very constructive and relevant to the enjoyment of Dom 3 for a lot of people, even if it is primarily a multiplayer game.

[VedalkenBear]

UncleYee: A very good point, but we have no direct methods of improving the AI. About the only option we have are rather brute force methods of choking off specific decision trees (removing choices from consideration).

I wish we did, because I'm primarily a SP person.

[Edi]

Wikd Thots:

If you're the one who is asking how to go about doing something that is not possible with the vanilla game straight out of the box and then sitting back and saying "Nope, not interested in doing that myself", you're painting a huge bullseye on your arse. So don't be surprised when people take the opportunity to see if they can land a savage kick right in the middle of it.

You want variety, changes, then do the experimenting yourself if there is no mod out there that does what you're looking for. Do NOT expect that somebody will do it for you. The people who do mods and maps already get little enough thanks for their efforts, and most of that comes from other modders who know how important it is to get feedback on what you do.

If you expect others to do your work for you and then get up on a high horse about how you shouldn't need to lift a finger simply because you have offered no criticisms of the game (at least in public) when you get irate answers, you are not going to get any sympathy. In your opening post you said you wanted mods of a specific type, then practically demanded that somebody make them for you. If that's not an invitation to get flamed to a crisp, I don't know what is. It's fairly a miracle the response has been as mild as it has been.

You were already given advice on how to change maps so that they have no indies, thus eliminating the hordes of crap the AI so loves to use. There are a few ready-made NI maps out there, if you want more, take the time to do them.

The bottom line is that given the number of people who post here, or just lurk and read the forums, the people who actually produce mods, maps and documentation are few compared to the whole. They will act on their own priorities first, everything else second unless they see benefit for their own projects in doing something for someone else.

[Gandalf Parker]

Well put Uncle Yee. Personally I dont tend to enjoy MP much either. Im just not much for person-to-person challenges. Its ok but it tends to be for me, what SP is apparently for others. So I agree that the "mp is the answer" makes me wish that the conversation didnt get sidetracked that way.

As to the original questions:
Im not sure if setting the pretender and scales can be done in a mod. But it can in a map.

I can understand not wanting to play with no indepts just to get a different AI action. That would not lead to better game play. You might as well play on the mini-map battle simulator where you make the armies and they meet on the next turn. As far as whether or not thats the important flaw in AI, I dont know.

There might be a mod in the mod subforum that duplicates most of the units of a nation which you can tweak to your desire. Some of the "improved" versions of the present nations might give you a clue on how to remove the "weak" pieces. Then you can start a game with that nation, select the god and scales, and after the first turn set that nation to AI.

[Xietor]

I do want to give my thanks and appreciation for the obvious effort that went into "Black Steel of Ulm" made by arralen.

The worthy heroes mod that gets a ton of praise,i am sure is good, but i have used it as Pangaea, and have not really noticed what it does? My heroes appear to be the same and have the same stats. Shrug. Not sure if they come more often or what?

AI improvement I think should not be a mod. That is a core game value that affects every single person that buys the game, like a bug. Bugs and AI improvements are better done by the makers of the game.

While the AI could stand some tinkering, it is not so bad that it cannot wait until dom IV.

[Wikd Thots]

Thanks gandolf that is the closest thing to an answer that I have seen yet. But it means that if I want to play abbysia against ulm then first I have to learn ulm well enough to build a better ulm to play against. Eventually I might be able to make a kickass abbysia ai mod to offer online. But I do not think I will be able to make better versions of something like pangae.
I understand that YOU would be better to do that? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Gandalf Parker]

Heehee, nice try. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/cool.gif
Well I have written up quite a few Pangaean tips. I think one even made it into the manual. Im not sure if my method of play could be modded to focus the AI to play that way. Maybe, someday, I might take a stab at it. Im not really into mods. More into the maps and the server side of things.

[Arralen]

Maybe the problem is not the game nor the AI, but the players ?!

I have the vague impression, that some SP players try to "beat the game".
Not beat single nations, their adversaries on the gameboard, mind you, but the game engine itself. After a time they succeed, find out which moves the AI uses, which tactics it cannot cope with at all. Then use that knowledge to roll all over it.

Maybe this comes from all those badly designed games out there, be it "strategy" (tactical) games which let the player re-start insanely difficult scenarios until they figured out the only way to win, or RPGs with pre-set pathes to follow .. dunno.. .

However, the effect is, that no AI which could be realised within the constrains of Dominions will ever satisfy them - it would require "thinking" on a human level. Even (e.g.) the best chess AI would be hopelessly inept, because Dominions is so much more complicated.


Actually, I myself do not play (blitz) MP anymore, because I'm thoroughly fed up with the ultra-competitive play this requires: Lots of pretender builds simply do not work then, lots of aspects never get used.

Instead, I play SP. With AI on normal level - I mostly use pre-designed pretenders for the AI. And as I do quite some roleplaying, I get some fun out of it. E.g. at some point my prophet (2nd in HoF) got killed by some string of bad luck. In a competitive game, I would have simple got my a new one as soon as possible. In my SP game, I switched every mage available to research enchantment-7 to get my prophet back as mummy. I'll have to empower some mage, maybe my pretender, too - quite costly, therefore inefficient and suicidal in MP.
But fun.

And sometimes I even get my butt kicked by some AI which had a lucky (head)start for some reason. That's ok.

Therefore - try to make in-game decisions. Not to out-whit the game rules or the game engine itself ...

[Nick_K]

It's not realistic in a turn based strategy game to expect an AI that can seriously challenge an experienced human player without either cheating or being very lucky. "The AI sucks!" is a complaint I've seen on the forums for pretty much every game I visit. Really though, anyone who wants AI of approximately human level will have to wait 20 years or so.

[Gandalf Parker]

Arralen said:
Instead, I play SP. With AI on normal level - I mostly use pre-designed pretenders for the AI. And as I do quite some roleplaying, I get some fun out of it. E.g. at some point my prophet (2nd in HoF) got killed by some string of bad luck. In a competitive game, I would have simple got my a new one as soon as possible. In my SP game, I switched every mage available to research enchantment-7 to get my prophet back as mummy. I'll have to empower some mage, maybe my pretender, too - quite costly, therefore inefficient and suicidal in MP.
But fun.



That sounds like the way I play.

[Wikd Thots]

[censored] I should have had gandolf write the request. It feels like mine pissed everyone off even though they are not disagreeing with me.

I am not a solo player. I am not wanting a human level AI. I just want the people who seem to know how to do a better AI to go ahead and [censored] do it. I see so many threads that trash the game and are full of opinions by people who seem able to mod a fix. I was just trying to get some of them to maybe TRY and prove their point before I get to hate the game as much as they do.

I figured that starting a new thread asking for it was better than jumping into those other threads with a "then just [censored] fix it" comment. But apparently not since all it did was let them jump me with the same crap.

[Actuarian]

@Uncle Yee,

Good post! I generally prefer to play sp too. But then again I'm not complaining about the AI or asking others to mod the AI (which I don't think is really possible anyway).

The only type of multiplayer I play is two-player by email. That would alleviate most of your mp concerns and give you a less predictable opponent. The main problem with this is the slow pace of games, which doesn't really bother me. I can play in single player mode while I'm waiting for turns to fill up my dom3 desires. I can even play the same races and setup in SP to try out strategies.

The AI improvement I'd like to see is in the area of battle resolution, both in terms of the AI overruling scripts and in troops doing something very stupid, like leader launching a suicide assault or casting a completely useless spell.

[Shovah32]

The problem with pbem is the speed which makes it hard to test out a variety of plans/nations.

[Gandalf Parker]

MODERATORS WARNING
This is wandering off of topic and getting dangerously close to being personal to the parties involved. I do not feel that the INTENDED meaning of the thread is a bad one even if it was badly worded. So I do not wish to lock this lively discussion.

Lets go back to providing questions and answers please.
Gandalf Parker

[Wikd Thots]

Fine, I will try to quiet down. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif


Gandalf Parker said:
I can understand not wanting to play with no indepts just to get a different AI action. That would not lead to better game play. You might as well play on the mini-map battle simulator where you make the armies and they meet on the next turn. As far as whether or not thats the important flaw in AI, I dont know.



battle simulator? is that a mod? It still does not sound like what I want but it might help on just the formations and what orders to give.

[Edi]

Gandalf, I know it is a well-meaning thread. My previous post might seem a bit harsh, but it is not meant to be hostile, just to express how and why this thread turned out the way it did.

That said, I will also comment on the subject of these prospective AI boost mods: Making them, one for each nation, is a horrendously time-consuming task if you want to keep intact anything like the variety the game normally has. This is another reason why there are few people interested in the subject. It's a project on the order of the CBM mods, except perhaps even more difficult unless one wants to use the suggested quick and dirty methods of neutering independents.

On further reflection, the quick and dirty method of putting ridiculous resource costs on the indies does have a lot going for it, though, with some pretty decent advantages over a NI map:
AI will not recruit indies
If indie commanders and select other indie units are not modded, it will be possible to avoid all the hordes of chaff, while the national AI troops will be boosted by relatively small numbers of high quality troops (such as the plate cuirass crossbowmen, possibly decent heavy cavalry/cataphracts etc)
Players will still have access to indie mages recruitable from poptypes, allowing branching out if they do not have those types of magic
AI will also use these mages, at least some of the time.
This type of mod would not be at all difficult to do, and the idea itself is intriguing enough that I might actually do one just for the hell of it. After all, there are not that many independent units and I have the full list of poptypes to boot.

[Foodstamp]

BTW

http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=515261&page=0&view=collap sed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1

Sounds like this mod may be a good challenge for SP players.

[Wikd Thots]

YEAH! That is what I am talking about!
A better AI for Mictlan.
Thanks you Foodstamp

[Arralen]

Foodstamp said:
BTW
http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=515261&page=0&view=collap sed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
Sounds like this mod may be a good challenge for SP players.



It's not a good idea, it's rediculous ... . Basically breaks the game, and would require tons of work to do for all nations ... .

[Foodstamp]

huh?

[Wikd Thots]

Why is making a new balanced nation good, and making an unbalanced version of nations for AI play a bad thing?

[Arralen]

Ok, I'll add some details to the original thread ...

In short: The way proposed there is NOT the way to help the AI play better. IMNSHO.

[Wikd Thots]

I have not looked at that mod yet. But I was hoping that it removed the things that the AI "wasted" gold and resources on. And possibly made the "good" units cheaper for it. Maybe added a another site or two that would boost gems or slaves.

[Foodstamp]

The mod sounds like it starts Mictlan with an overpowered Pretender that spawns dominion producing juggernauts, quality troops and SC style special banelords.

It sounds like that mod would go a long ways towards providing a person with a challenging single player game.

That doesn't sound stupid, ridiculous, or like a game breaker to me. It sounds like just the type of mod the original poster was looking for.

[Arralen]

Basically, it lets the AI play a different game than the player. Turns it into a F9W9S9 bless monster that has little similarities with the original nation.

Is it fun for a player to go against nations from a totally different game?
Is that really a "satisfying" challenge?
Is it really fun to play against let's say 5 of those nations, which all swamp you with super-blessed summons and have most of its national units not used at all?

I doubt so.

And if someone really needs the challenge of fighting against impossible numbers - there's an easier way to achieve that:
Start a game with AI set to impossible , set research to easy. Hit "next turn" 10x or so without doing anything.
If you're still alive, play normally, but only recruit mages every other turn and never set more than 34% of your mages to research.

Furthermore, I really doubt the idea that the AI "wastes" gold and ressources on units. If there are units in the game which are really a waste to build, than that is a balance issue, not an AI issue. (Yes, there's a BIG balance issue. Yes, I'm gonna do a mod that corrects that.)
I agree that there are units which are somewhat 'special', which the AI can't really make use of. Those might be tweaked, or the devs asked to do something about the AI in that case.

[Wikd Thots]

Arralen said:
Is it fun for a player to go against nations from a totally different game?
Is that really a "satisfying" challenge?
Is it really fun to play against let's say 5 of those nations, which all swamp you with super-blessed summons and have most of its national units not used at all?



Yes, yes, probably not.

As far as getting the devs to fix it, fine. Somehow I think some modded AIs that duplicate the playing abilities of the better players might take less time.

[Foodstamp]

I think your observations may be a bit off base. I think a lot of players including the original poster would probably enjoy a mod like the one I linked to.

I think the points you bring up are really just a matter of opinion more than anything else. I see the mod to be as viable solution as your solution you suggest about hitting next turn 10 times.

Take a second look at your posts. They really seem to stem from an opinion you have on how single player games should be played rather than an actual argument that the mod hurts a player's experience.

[vfb]

Wikd Thots said:
What part of "NO I do not want to hear that mp is the answer" do you people not understand? I HAVE played MP! I know what it is good for. And I plan to play it much more.

But I want to experiment with tactics and things without quitting an mp game as soon as I figure out that it was a bust. Or hear from the experts here "why did you do that"? I've seen some of the comments here and I don't care to play with some people until I have had a chance to experiment some more. The only alternative seems to be to listen to the trashers and do whatever they say is best.




Sorry to hear you are getting 'trashed' in MP for being noobish. If an expert was to ask me, "Why did you do that?", I wouldn't be offended. The answer is "Because I thought it would work. Did I forget to mention that I'm a noob?"

I've found that the experienced players have been willing to give me good advice. And this is even in a game where I eventually may end up as their opponent. I've also seen experienced players give out strategic advice to other players when a game they are in is being set up.

In my opinion, the AI is already good enough to get an idea whether or not your overall strategy (bless, scales, SC pretender, whatever) is broken or worth a try. And a strategy that is 'worth a try' may still be broken in MP, but there's only one way you are going to find out.

For tactical experiments, I love the Mini_v3.map and have several versions of it now for trying out tactics and simulating battles. You need to play both sides to set up the unit's battle orders correctly, of course. Edi's spreadsheets will give you all the IDs you need to set up any matchup. You can even play a full game hotseat against yourself if there's something you need to test that the Mini map won't do.

When your MP games go 'bust', you might want to just keep playing until you are dead, instead of quitting. The point of the game for me is playing, not winning. If you are expecting to win when you are playing against 8 other human players, then I think you are just setting yourself up to be disappointed.

If there are specific people that you do not have fun playing with, then host your own game. There's nothing wrong with telling someone you'd prefer they did not join your game, if you did not enjoy playing with them in a previous game. Keep looking and I'm sure you will find some people you can have fun playing with!

[llamabeast]

I'd just like to butt in to the discussion, because I got the impression that quite a few players have the impression that most of the MP going on is super-competitive. That isn't my experience at all - I've found there's a lot of role-playing going on, interesting tactics and friendly gaming. Maybe its just a feature of playing the generally larger-and-longer games organised in the forum rather than the blitzes organised in the IRC channel, I don't know.

In any case, I've never felt under pressure to go for a completely optimal game or anything. The variation in player skill, plus diplomacy and role-playing add enough complication to the mix that it's not necessary to go down the min-maxing route.

I would really encourage people who haven't played much MP to join some of the new games organised in the MP forum here, they really are excellent fun and very friendly.

Also the 1-turn-a-day system I find works well, and doesn't take up a lot of time (unless you sign up to multiple games!), although of course it could be difficult for people who have varied schedules, travel a lot etc..

Just to be clear, my point isn't in any way to put down SP or say that everyone should play MP. Just that I wouldn't like everyone to think that all MP games are super-competitive, because that isn't what I've found at all.

[Sombre]

I'm one of the people who has complained about the behaviour of the AI. I feel there are issues with it that should be fixed - I don't think it would take a silly amount of time and it would improve SP for me no ends.

I can mod and have made several mods. I made an AI Mictlan in some random thread but no-one seemed to have any interest in it - it just gave them unlimited bloodslaves basically, since the AI is miserable at blood nations.

The fact of the matter is I can't change the behaviour of the AI by modding. It will still do things seemingly at random, such as throwing 30 assorted troops at a 30 PD province with a missile based army camped there. Result; AI loses 30 or so troops every turn for no gain. That's a matter of behaviour not of the AI needing super troops or extra resources.

Sure if you give all the AI nations insane stats, unlimited resources etc then the game will be harder to play. But for me it wouldn't be any more fun, because the AI would continue to do the same stupid things, it would still send 30 troops against 200, but this time it would win, because the 30 troops would all be seraphs or something insane like that. Or losing 30 troops wouldn't matter at all, since they have 1000 times the gold you do. That to me is not fun.

And no, I don't hate the game. Why would I play and make mods for a game that I hate. I'm just not a fanboy who pretends everything is perfect and constantly moves the discussion away from clear flaws in the game.

On the subject of impossible ai vs normal (with setup by human), I'm now leaning towards the normal human switch ones. Simply because you can give them a thematic setup which is more interesting - they aren't actually stronger, because the AI gets big boosts on impossible, but their behaviour seems better and it's more fun to play against an AI that at least /appears/ to have a coherent plan.

[Gandalf Parker]

Wikd Thots said:
Fine, I will try to quiet down. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif


Gandalf Parker said:
I can understand not wanting to play with no indepts just to get a different AI action. That would not lead to better game play. You might as well play on the mini-map battle simulator where you make the armies and they meet on the next turn. As far as whether or not thats the important flaw in AI, I dont know.



battle simulator? is that a mod? It still does not sound like what I want but it might help on just the formations and what orders to give.



Sorry I was slow getting back to this.
The mini-map is at http://www.dom3minions.com/docs/Mini_v3.zip

Create an early era game on the mini-map and join as a human player for Arcoscepphale and human player for Ermor. You will find that they both have an additional army. Set the formations and scripts, then have them both meet in one of the neighboring provinces. Watch the battle. If you want to do it again then just quit that game and start another on the same map. If you want to try different armies then use notepad to edit the Mini_v3.map file. You can select commanders, units, equipment, set experience levels, etc.

Gandalf Parker

[MaxWilson]

Xietor said:
AI improvement I think should not be a mod. That is a core game value that affects every single person that buys the game, like a bug. Bugs and AI improvements are better done by the makers of the game.

While the AI could stand some tinkering, it is not so bad that it cannot wait until dom IV.



In theory, we have everything we need to be able to create a better AI because of the PBEM architecture. A .trn file contains all the information about the current turn that you'd need to write a .h file giving orders for the next turn. I've peeked at the .h files and seen some patterns--for instance units that aren't moving that turn have "FF" has a destination and <destination province number> otherwise--but to be honest I'm not sure I could decode the .trn files. But in principle we could write an AI that substitutes for a human by generating .h files.

Maybe for Dom IV. Or if I get a lot smarter than I am now.

-Max

[MaxWilson]

vfb said:
I've found that the experienced players have been willing to give me good advice. And this is even in a game where I eventually may end up as their opponent. I've also seen experienced players give out strategic advice to other players when a game they are in is being set up.




Heh. Isn't that what this thread is all about, people wishing they could give strategic advice to their opponent (the AI) for a more challenging game?

By the way, how do you test strategies requiring spells/gems on the mini-map? Since #startspell only works for one turn you can't wait for gems to accumulate. It occurred to me just now that you could mod in a site giving lots of gems, but until now I haven't used the minimap much because of that.

-Max

[Gandalf Parker]

There are units that tend to show up with lots of gems. I dont remember what they are but adding them in would give you someone to snag the gems off of. You could use the All_Units game to go thru the different units and see what they show up with.

[vfb]

For spells I just add some researchers (which I may want in the battle anyway), set research on fast, and hit host until it's at the level I need. As long as one dominion doesn't overpower the other this is pretty safe and really doesn't take that long. Random events rare helps too.

[Sombre]

It would be quicker to just mod the spells so they're at 1 gem, research level 1.

[vfb]

I didn't think of setting spell research to 1, that's a good idea! But you might want to avoid changing the number of gems, since that will affect how the spells are cast in the battle.

[Ballbarian]

For what it's worth, the next version of RanDom will accomodate custom gods. I am in the middle of a test game with a set of pre made gods using builds and scales that I have seen on the forums (including Gorgzilla, a E9N4 Gorgon with 10 dominion) and it has made for a more challenging game. I created the custom god files within a set of house rules where the god for the given nation was one available to that nation and the points available were as if the god were dormant. Also, I kit the god with items that I would use on my own god, only the AI begins the game with these items (artifacts excluded). It will also be possible to include custom starting units and sites if the designer / player so chooses.

[Foodstamp]

Ballbarian said:
For what it's worth, the next version of RanDom will accomodate custom gods. I am in the middle of a test game with a set of pre made gods using builds and scales that I have seen on the forums (including Gorgzilla, a E9N4 Gorgon with 10 dominion) and it has made for a more challenging game. I created the custom god files within a set of house rules where the god for the given nation was one available to that nation and the points available were as if the god were dormant. Also, I kit the god with items that I would use on my own god, only the AI begins the game with these items (artifacts excluded). It will also be possible to include custom starting units and sites if the designer / player so chooses.



Sounds awesome http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

[Gandalf Parker]

I was considering the comments about no-indepents on the maps. Do you end up with no army to fight to take an indept province? Of course I could blank all the provinces on a map and then assign an army to each one but the way I do it that would be pretty haphazard.

On the other hand, we could create a set for RanDom. Make province sets that said
terrain:forest
@ 3
elephants & slingers
forest archers
wolf clan

Something like that. Well basically for each terrain have a few sets of the type of army you could usually expect there. Then set RanDom for 100% fill. That way there would be no poptypes to recruit but still reasonable armies to fight.

[MaxWilson]

My understanding is that armies are placed before poptypes are (re-) set. Therefore, the no-indie maps still have defending armies, even though you can't recruit there after you conquer it.

-Max

[Edi]

Gandalf Parker said:
I was considering the comments about no-indepents on the maps. Do you end up with no army to fight to take an indept province? Of course I could blank all the provinces on a map and then assign an army to each one but the way I do it that would be pretty haphazard.

On the other hand, we could create a set for RanDom. Make province sets that said
terrain:forest
@ 3
elephants & slingers
forest archers
wolf clan

Something like that. Well basically for each terrain have a few sets of the type of army you could usually expect there. Then set RanDom for 100% fill. That way there would be no poptypes to recruit but still reasonable armies to fight.


Gandalf, I believe we already discussed this one. When the game is generated, it assigns random poptype to each province, generates the indie defenders, magic sites and whatever else according to game settings.

Only after that does it parse the map file for the province specific scripts, which is where the poptype assignments go. If #setland is used, the indie defenders stay, but the poptype gets deleted. So you still need to fight the indies, you just can't recruit them.

[Sombre]

I hope people here are willing to give the NI maps a go. They really are quite fun and they change the game more than you'd think.

[Gandalf Parker]

Edi said:

Gandalf Parker said:
Something like that. Well basically for each terrain have a few sets of the type of army you could usually expect there. Then set RanDom for 100% fill. That way there would be no poptypes to recruit but still reasonable armies to fight.


Gandalf, I believe we already discussed this one. When the game is generated, it assigns random poptype to each province, generates the indie defenders, magic sites and whatever else according to game settings.

Only after that does it parse the map file for the province specific scripts, which is where the poptype assignments go. If #setland is used, the indie defenders stay, but the poptype gets deleted. So you still need to fight the indies, you just can't recruit them.



It would still be worth doing thru RanDom. It would give the person doing it a chance to select the defenders, and how often they occur. You could also select appropriate magic items, include summons, and have special groups for islands lakes volcanoes(lonely mountains) etc. In a no-indepts map some people might prefer alot more knight groups with mage backups.

[Edi]

I've not played around with RanDom, so I wouldn't know about that. I've had my hands too full to even start getting familiar with all of the nifty little things we have seen here. I'll take your word for it.

[Gandalf Parker]

RanDom is way cool. Its a take-off on my chaos maps for Dom2. I would randomly fill a map with structures like stray castles, and strange armies with equipment. I re-randomized them daily for new playing experiences. They went over well but the way I did it was too random. The armies might be made up of low units, summons, even pretenders. Sometimes water units on land and land units in water.

I suggested at the time, something called Semi-Random. Designed provinces that could be randomly placed. Such as
Terrain: forest
poptype: Deer Tribal
commander: deer shaman
units: deer tribe warriors
units: deer tribe archers
commander: centaur hierophant
equipment: black bow
units: centaur archers
magic site: that one that allows recruiting centaurs

That would be one file. Many such files could be placed by having the program look for proper terrains. Put mountain provinces in mountains, small town things in farmland, waste, swamp, etc etc. Since then, RanDom now also recognizes island, lake, volcano(lonely mountain), penninsula. And it allows sub-randoms so that you can have your designed province have some slight variety in it. Such as I could list Black Bow, Longbow of Accuracy, Bow of War as randoms for the centaur leader..

Just wandering thru the magic sites gives you plenty of reason to design provinces. So that you fight the mages that a site will allow recruiting, or create a dragons cave, or a lost village of the undead with sites to get undead. I think that everyone should donate a few provinces to the project. Lots of them would be great. Then processing a map thru it would give you a really fun map to play on that isnt quite as insane as my old program used to create.

[Wikd Thots]

That sounds like fun.
I am not ready to make a map.
But I think I can design a single province. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/firedevil.gif

[Xietor]

I want to eat crow when i said the worthy hero mod did not seem to affect Pangaea, when in fact it bumped a hero's blood from 3 to 4, which is quite big for Pangaea blood users. Just noticed that tonight.

Of course, Pangaea already had 4 pretty tough heroes, so I am sure it was not a point of emphasis, like some of the races that failed to get many or any heroes. Now that i have it, i leave it on. Man got a pretty nice hero i have not seen before, 4a2n 2h, recuperation.