Dominions 2. AI. Suggestions, that how to fix it.

[MStavros]

Yeah, if the indy setting is 7 or more, nothing will happen. The only difference is, that you cannot expand that fast.

I think we mentioned the biggest weaknesses of the strategic AI. It is up for the devs now, to upgrade it.

Oh and Kris, if you had some games against the AI, please post your opinion.

[MythicalMino]

ok, just won my first game...I was Pythium...2 AI's (Marignon and Jotun)....

Throughout the game, Jotun pretty much had the lead in army size and provinces...Marignon just never really got off the ground...I led the entire game in research, something I have NEVER done in Dom1....

It took about 20 or so turns to finally meet up with the Ai (Jotun)...Marignon soon followed....Marignon and Jotun seemed to be close, so perhaps they were fighting quite a bit, and that could be why Marignon just didn't do much.

Oh yeah, game settings: default indeps setting, Victory Points turned on (10 points wins the game)

Marignon, I never seen much of an army from them....Jotun, I seen several 50+ strong armies, BUT, mostly Militia. Some were Barbarian Horsemen, Barbarians, and the like...but, mostly militia. I did see several mages/priests...now i am not sure I remember.

Perhaps Jotum would have given me some trouble, but I went for an all or nothing push to the final VP's at turn 33. They were beginning to hit me in 2 different spots at that time, taking my provinces, and re-taking theirs that I took from them, but, it was too little too late. I had gotten close enough to that final 3 point Province, which was VERY poorly defended I thought for being one of the highest VP spots on the map.

I did see Jotun split a 60 man army, and start to attack in two different directions on one of my borders, but again, too little too late.

I am going to try bumping up the indeps a bit, maybe go up to 5 or 6...also perhaps play with 5 AI's this next game.

Anyways, that was my battle report....oh, I am kinda thinking that maybe the VP's kinda screws up the AI too....Jotun just didn't seem too concerned with that 3 point province they had...I boosted up the defense level up high, and built fortresses in my higher point provinces...

Oh well...will let you know about the next game when it is finished or time runs out....

[Kristoffer O]

Originally posted by MStavros:
Oh and Kris, if you had some games against the AI, please post your opinion.

I will be away for a couple of days, but I'll be back sunday.

The main issue is that humans use very focused strategies, compared to the computer that tends to dabble in a bit of everything.

Sadly also (just like Dom I) it looks like the computer doesn't use it's pretender for anything beyond sitting in the capital doing research, casting rituals, and making magic items. It doesn't use the predtender for combat advantage the way a human would. As far as I can tell, it also doesn't use the pretender for site searching (in person).

On the impossible level Illwinter should have hardcoded more focused behavior. Only allowing certain units, certain research, and certain spells to cast. It wouldn't be as good as a human, but could mimic some human behavior.


Hey IW- If you guys want I could come up with a few simple rules for each nation. Perhaps you could code that into a new level of AI.

Feel free to post them or send them to me. I can't promise that it will be implemented, but if and when we adress the AI it can be useful.

[MStavros]

Helpful post cpbeller.
I had the same experience. 50-60 units in an AI army *or less*, and mostly cheap, weak units.

[LordArioch]

Are any of you people that find the AI easy playing with the suggested number of AI? It's quite possible to outexpand them if the entire map is empty space because I think they tend to fight among themselves more than against you.
Try playing the maps with 6+ AI and not 2...see if that changes things any.

[Mortifer]

I had various games with 2-6 AIs. With 6 AIs, the challenge is bigger, but the AI is not better.
I think the AI's focusing on cheap units. This is very weird. I barely met with stronger enemy units, or if yes, they were small in numbers.
Right now it is way to easy to beat the AI, since strategically it is weak.
It is making maneuvers with more - small armies usually + those armies are built up from weak troops. = no real challenge for a strong human 'campaign army'.

[MythicalMino]

ok, will try the recommended amount of players (AI's) in the next game i set up...which, i am getting ready to get it started in just a bit...

Will post how that one is going....

[Mortifer]

Hm maybe we should send in saved games?

[licker]

Simple AI rules eh?

Well I'm sure there are others who are better equiped to deal with specifics, but I'll spew some thoughts out just in the hopes to get the ball rolling.

It seems to me that perhaps the AIs are not focused enough, maybe they have too many inputs to weigh and consider, and those inputs are not yet balanced correctly, or perhaps even fataly flawed due to slight game mechanic tweeks (such as dealing with supply better, and worse).

With that in mind I'd like to see a set of AI styles that focus the AI in one (or maybe a few) direction for the entire game.

Examples of these styles can be picked up from other TBS games, AoW1 and MoM had settings for the AI to follow (expander, conquerer, defender, ...) so perhaps it is posible to give these styles to the different AI nations in a game, and let them try to focus their energy in specific directions (it would be interesting to let the player even pick the style, or leave it as random). If it is randomized each nation should probably have weighted choices as certain styles will better fit certain nations.

Ok so now we have a rough framework from which to work with. Lets try some specifics.

Firstly the style has to be picked (or incorperated) from the instant the AI designs the nation. Lets make two broad styles with several sub-styles possible within them. The two broad catagories can be Might and Magic ( ). A nation with a Might style would focus on creating armies based on strong recruited units (not militia and LI) a nation with a Magic style would focus on creating armies with mages and or summons, not relying as much on the stronger (more costly) recruitable units. Obviously there would be some overlap between the styles.

Sub-Styles could be things like, expander, conquerer, defender, builder (economizer?), researcher, ...

An expander would attempt to expand its boarders through indies, trying to avoid early national conflicts, a conquerer would expand by starteing early national conflicts, a defender would expand, and try to build up more internal defense before attacking new provinces, a builder would be similar to a defender I guess or you could make it an artificier, a researcher would devote more resources to mages and getting spell levels quickly. Furter distinctions within these sub-styles could be based on how many resources are spent on buffing commanders vs. summoning vs. more units.

The main idea is to give each AI a path for it to follow, rather than allowing it to dabble a little in everything (which is rarely going to make it successful). This doesn't go into strategic elements for actual game play, but others can work on those issues better than I can. One thing that the AI needs is the ability to use powerful combos. In fact the styles can be made such that they aim toward these powerful combos.

[licker]

One further note I forgot to add. The AI must be capeable of switching styles (though not easilly) if the circumstances merit. Say the AI was origionally a magic researcher, but the first 5 provinces it conquered were very resource rich and site poor, there need to be some mechanism by whcih the AI can switch to the more appropriate Might and conquerer strategy. I'd say that the limit to make that decision should be for every 5 provinces (or a scaled number based on map size) that the AI gains or loses. However, at some point further restrictions should be placed on changing a style, as once enough headway has been made with a style it is probably a bad idea to change it (at least broadly).