The AI... when will ìt earn its "I"?

[Master Belisarius]

Sure, the AI is not as good I would like. But,
playing with 3 or 4 good TDM AIs (United Flora,
EA, Aquilaeian, etc), small galaxy, high AI bonuses and 3 starting planets, usually I had challenging games.

The AI had big problems when need to take many decisions (for example, what planets protect or what planets attack). But in games with not many systems, the AI plays far better.

[Gryphin]

Grandpa Kim,
No need to apologies. You are expressing your perception. I am not a programmer. I do remember the times I tried to write “rules” for solitaire games with miniature table top soldiers. After about 3 pages it became clear that it was unfeasible to be complete. There was always one more condition that had to be accounted for. I feel I can imagine how much code must go into any games Algorithm Intellect. Grandpa Kim, what have you done along these lines? Accusing the industry of broken promises is easy. Surely you must have something to base your perceptions on. I am interested in hearing more. Do you have some incite as to what it takes to write a superb AI? After all, I could well be wrong.

Folks,
I ask again, what do you think? How much code and how much time would it take to make the Algorithm Intellect so good you could not find enough problems in SEIV or any game to complain about? Are you willing to pay $100 dollars for a game that has an Algorithm Intellect that can challenge you? How about $200? Let’s say you are willing to pay that much, how many others out there are willing to pay that much?

[Fyron]

The biggest challenge to programming an AI for a game like SE4 is the fact that it has to be able to cope with random and arbitrary changes to the data files. Games that have 0 moddability are often able to (not any guarantee) have stronger AIs because programming time does not have to be spent making it adaptable to changes to the data files.

[Atrocities]

It has been my experience that if you play with medium/medium or medium/high the AI does put on more of a challenge.

[Grandpa Kim]

Gryphin, my opinion is more of a state-of-the-world perception than one directed at any specific niche of any specific industry. You have hit on one world-wide attitude: If it's too hard, it's okay to do a poor job. The other is money: do as little as possible to make as much as possible. Both cases mean "I'm breaking my promise".

I work in new housing and believe me housing and computers are running neck and neck in screwing the public.

I am not a programmer either, but I know my limits. I cannot program to my own satisfaction. Those who have chosen that profession have taken on that job. Now, gentlemen, please do your job!

But I do have some ideas about how to program an AI. I think before you get down to specific cases, you must give the AI a plan to work from. Give it goals, make it aware of common (and not so common) problems and provide general solutions. For instance running out of supplies is a common problem. The current solution is to send the ship(s) back to a resupply depot. There are at least four other solutions to that problem! This is a beginning only, but something the AI can always fall back on.

I'm sure the programmers out there can pick this to pieces... and that's the problem. Rather than say, "Damn it! There's got to be a way to make this work." they say, "It's too hard." You can take out the word programmers and replace it with any profession you like; it will still be true.

Okay, enough of that rant... and thread hijacking.

[Wardad]

no AI yet...

It's an Algorithm Stupidity System.

[geoschmo]

I think some people generally think that this kind of programming then it easier then it really is.

Consider for example the programming needed to create a quality chess playing AI program. There you have a game with a much simpiler rule set. Two players, 16 pieces of only 5 different kinds on an 8 by 8 grid. Most pieces have only 2 or 3 rules determining everything they are capable of doing in the game. Seems like it would be easy no? In fact programmers thought it would be easy. But it took decades of work by hundreds if not thousands of programmers world wide to come up with a program capable of beating even a moderatly skilled player. It was only in the Last few years that one could defeat the best players, and even now it doesn't beat them every time.

Se4 by comparison is much more complex. Exponentially more variables, just in the stock game, not even taking into consideration what can be done with mods. It's not suprising that the AI is much more difficult to program. It's actually suprising that it's as decent as it is.

It's no suprise that the game industry has gone towards real time strategy. With real time strategy it's much easier to give a human player a tough game because humans can't think as fast as computers can. This does wonders for masking repetative or illogical behavior by the AI. With a turn based strategy game the human player can think about their moves as long as they want before comitting to them. Remeber, computers, even the big ones, aren't smarter then humans, just faster. Make them wait on us the computer doesn't stand a real chance then.

Geoschmo

[ December 21, 2003, 23:37: Message edited by: geoschmo ]