Cikomyr

Join Date 06/2005

+11

Question to Brad, alias Our God Draginol :o)

I read in one of your post that the AI wasn't designed to deal with ships who can travel faster than 8 pc/week.

I now play the game with no ships faster than 8 pc/weeks, and I find it a lot harder. I would like to know the other critical blind spots of the AI so I could avoid to exploit them, allowing the AI to fight on a more equal ground.

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

Play with your eyes closed !

Successfully updated karma reason!

Frogboy

Join Date 03/2001

+2412

The basic premise of the AI is that it is a reactive AI. It tries to predict what its oppponents are going to do N turns into the future.

The more moves a ship has, the harder it is to predict. It's not so much a blindspot but the inability for the AI to plan N turns into the future.

The big computing advantage of artificial intelligence is how it can coordinate a long term strategy. Its disadvantage is that it is inferior to humans in single turn tactical strategy.

Successfully updated karma reason!

The big computing advantage of artificial intelligence is how it can coordinate a long term strategy. Its disadvantage is that it is inferior to humans in single turn tactical strategy.

Right, because the human can micro-manage.... but the longer that the player micromanages, does that not give the AI more time in order to formulate it's strategy? Or does the Galciv 2 AI even work that way?

I guess the question is, will the AI make better moves when you give it more time between turns?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Alstein

Join Date 07/2004

+55

Wouldn't the solution to this be make drives a lot bigger on larger hulls?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Wouldn't the solution to this be make drives a lot bigger on larger hulls?

They will, in Dark Avatar. They want to nerf down engines (and I support them).

I was more looking into a way to play on par against the AI, while not using cheesy tactic (my invasion forces of 20 transports who could move 50 pc/week each was one. 14 billion people wiped in 1 week). After all, it's not fair for them if they cannot do the same thing to me.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Mumblefratz

Join Date 07/2006

+139

The basic premise of the AI is that it is a reactive AI. It tries to predict what its opponents are going to do N turns into the future.
The more moves a ship has, the harder it is to predict. It's not so much a blindspot but the inability for the AI to plan N turns into the future.
The big computing advantage of artificial intelligence is how it can coordinate a long term strategy. Its disadvantage is that it is inferior to humans in single turn tactical strategy.

No doubt all this is true. This makes perfect sense as to why the AI cannot defend against multiple simultaneous long range attacks. But the human would have difficulty defending against multiple simultaneous long range attacks as well. Nothing in this reasoning indicates to me why the AI isn’t capable of launching it’s own multiple simultaneous long range attacks.

It seems to me that this is a tactic that’s difficult to defend against by both sides and one that both sides are able to implement. I don’t see where speed is intrinsically unfair.

In any case I do realize that this is a fait accompli and any argument is moot. From the other thread.

Engines have been heavily tweaked and that will no doubt cause some angst.

Clearly, its your game and you’ll do with it what you want, as has been proven time and again. Just consider this some of the angst.

In the end this will make no real difference, the people that can beat suicidal AI’s will still be able to beat suicidal AI’s, it will just take longer and be a bigger micro management pain.

Successfully updated karma reason!

It seems to me that this is a tactic that’s difficult to defend against by both sides and one that both sides are able to implement. I don’t see where speed is intrinsically unfair.

Well, with a good planning a fortifying key worlds even in peacetime, you can defend against that kind of tactic.

Problem is, there isn't the need, so we can allow ourselves to sit with no military, and if the alien declare war on us, we know we have at least 15 turns before being in any real danger.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Wasn't there going to be a slider in DA to increase the number of turns the AI planned ahead? Those with very capable gaming rigs could set the slider insanely far ahead and get a super AI?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Wasn't there going to be a slider in DA to increase the number of turns the AI planned ahead? Those with very capable gaming rigs could set the slider insanely far ahead and get a super AI?

The problem isn't about how far ahead the AI plan, but how effectively it runs it's military in the "now", as M. Frogboy said. You can plan a military campaign for 5 years, but if you screw up on the battlefield, there is little left...

I personnaly think the AI should not declare war immediatly when it decides it's going to war against another player, Frogboy. Would it be possible for it to have 3 "state of mind", like:

- No animosity (like peace time right now)
- Preparation for war (military build up like it does right now when it declares war, but no attack algoritm planned)
- Open War (still military build up, but can freely attack)

It would be even better if the AI could place it's ships before the declaration of war, but I think it's too far ahead in AI writing yet. The transition between "peace" and "animosity" would be the same as it actually uses to declare war. And the transition between "animosity" and "open war" could either be when it reaches an acceptable difference of military rating, or maybe a set # of turn after being in "animosity" mode.

Successfully updated karma reason!

To sum the complaint...The AI needs to know how to prepare for war, especially on larger maps. Right now it just goes "I'm stronger, and don't like you, so I am declaring war." The human plans wars out far in advance and only declares war when he is ready to start blowing ships out of the sky...And as many ships/planets as possible in the first turn. All the planning is around maximizing this.

Successfully updated karma reason!

In the end this will make no real difference, the people that can beat suicidal AI’s will still be able to beat suicidal AI’s, it will just take longer and be a bigger micro management pain.

is because of

The AI needs to know how to prepare for war, especially on larger maps. Right now it just goes "I'm stronger, and don't like you, so I am declaring war." The human plans wars out far in advance and only declares war when he is ready to start blowing ships out of the sky...And as many ships/planets as possible in the first turn.

This is the problem that needs to be fixed.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Philocthetes

Join Date 10/2003

+153

The human plans wars out far in advance and only declares war when he is ready to start blowing ships out of the sky

I basically agree with Purge's take, but I want to speak up for those of us who have pacificst tendencies despite our love of wargames. I *almost* never start wars. My preparation to blow ships out of the sky is defensive until it is activated, after which I tend to lean twoards Mumble's notion that the best GCII defense is a strong offense.

(The *almost* is b/c sometimes the Torians just need their flat heads knocked together--can't stand the so-called "good" folks going on pogroms, especially against my trading partners)

Successfully updated karma reason!