Artificial Intelligence Would be Nice . . . . .

MrFun · March 8, 2001, 00:06

The AI in Call to Power II was pathetic, and I hope that Firaxis will do their best job in creating competent artificial opponent(s). (my thanks go to the modifiers who did their best fixing CTP II's AI)

I would say that Firaxis should be careful to not make artificial intelligent strategy lop-sided or too rigid.

What are everyone else's concerns or thoughts on artificial intelligence?

Zanzin · March 8, 2001, 01:08

Yo Mr. Fun.

I would like to see it as this -

The skill level you play on sets how 'smart' the computer is. On the easiest setting, you get a resonably stupid computer opponent, but you don't have any unfair advantages over them - like advantages in combat etc.
When you play on the hardest setting, you get a computer oppponent who makes clever, almost human like, decisions (I don't know if this is possible but in the end it all comes back to simple algorithms - how hard can it be?), so you actually get smart civs to play against. Whereas in CTP2, the computer didn't get smarter with higher skill levels, it just got unfair advatnages in everything - production rates, empire growth, science rates and combat multiplyers (at least it seems that way in CTP2)

Ofcourse, it was the same way in Civ2...the computer did get smarter up towards the higher end of the skill scale, but not that much smarter- mainly just unfair advantages.

So, yes, I'd like to see the computer with intelligence - not unfair advantages.

yin26 · March 8, 2001, 01:44

I always refer to Sid's Gettysburg! on this topic. Of course, its an RTS, so perhaps he can't do this precise thing in Civ3, but he made use of:

** Morle
** Experience
** Flank fire
** Leaders
** Terrain cover
** Entrenching
** Ambushes
** Fatigue (...I think...)

All of which, actually, affected morale such that if you didn't fight properly, you lost. No AI cheating at all, but you got your butt kicked.

On the econ side...well, there wasn't an econ side in that game, but without a strong "econ AI" and "diplomacy AI" in Civ3, none of that other stuff would make much difference. So this baby will need to hit on all cylinders to make us break a sweat.

Zanzin · March 8, 2001, 06:29

Yeah, I know what you mean Yin. I'm horribly afraid that because we all expect so much from Civ3, we're all going to get really dissapointed!

Sean · March 10, 2001, 20:42

Your exactly right Zanzin. I wouldn't think it easy though. Give me a smart AI, over a cheating AI anyday. A dumb AI that cheats, is still dumb!

------------------
Give me Liberty, or give me death!

DrFell · March 10, 2001, 21:30

Unfortunately its so damn difficult to write a decent AI

I'd like it if AI cheating WAS in the game, but it should be made optional, so for example, I might want to play the game at Deity difficulty, but give the AI no unfair advantages. But if I really want a challenge, I'd play the Deity AI with cheats on as well. I think there's no way the computer players can be made intelligent enough to challenge a decent human player with todays processor power.
What I most want to see in a Civ3 AI is properly co-ordinated attacks on my empire, and none of that stupid 'throw hundreds of units at a mountain fortress' tactic that happens too often on Civ2.

DrFell · March 10, 2001, 21:32

*DP*
[This message has been edited by DrFell (edited March 10, 2001).]

Sean · March 11, 2001, 05:56

I understand where you are coming from Dr Fell. And if your option was included in the game, I wouldn't complain. I just worry, that if you give a dumb AI, more resources, they will still waste them. ie buy building outdated units, or whatever.

------------------
Give me Liberty, or give me death!