Aristos
Lightseeker
It's a bit optimistic to see that sort of evolving AI in a CIV game any time soon.
specially with the current development team...
Soren, on the other hand... maybe, just maybe...
It's a bit optimistic to see that sort of evolving AI in a CIV game any time soon.
For most games the level of the AI depends more on how easy it is to make an AI to it than on how well they did it. As mentioned earlier it's not hard to make an AI which plays FPS at a very high level because you can simply increase their accuracy. Games that are formulated as an optimization problem can often be optimized more efficiently by a computer than it can by us, and combinatorial problems can be crunched more efficiently, but with a more complex game like Civ 5 which requires a lot of judgement it becomes harder.
SSG's Warlords series had very good AI for the time.
So Jharii, if the code was right, and some super-server had say 10 random though persistantly coded memetic AI's playing against random human Civ V players continuously input into the server. Over long enough time one could develop some almost perfect AI that could counter anything thrown at it? Or should I say, it could counter any "human" behaviour thrown at it? The code would almost write itself. The difficulty I feel would be in the code itself (obviously) in determining what human action relates to its goals and how the AI would manage to 'delete' old inefficient behaviours. But I see the logic. Fascinating stuff. In fact, future of human technology stuff. I need a cigarette....
The really funny thing is that THIS is what I would pay DLC prices for. Heck, you can keep the downloadable civ. Give me the "Deep Blue" AI code upgrade. I'd gladly pay extra for that than another Civ.
Do you mean this should only be used for the macro AI or also for detailed management? I think it could work with on a macro level, but the biggest flaws in the game are on a more tactical level. Doesn't matter if the AI triggers "Attack Jharii with 73% of your land units at his left flank" at the perfect timing if all he does is to suicide his units.You are correct regarding the difficulty combining the logic with the game mechanics. The functions are all there. We use them all the time, as does the AI. The goal would be change how the AI views its strategic and global resources and victory conditions (needs) vs. everything else in the game (wants) and how to apply the functions of the game to achieve these.
Do you mean this should only be used for the macro AI or also for detailed management? I think it could work with on a macro level, but the biggest flaws in the game are on a more tactical level. Doesn't matter if the AI triggers "Attack Jharii with 73% of your land units at his left flank" at the perfect timing if all he does is to suicide his units.
I found the EU3 AI to be horrible, maybe worse than Civ 5. There is a while since I played it, but I remember at first I really liked the concept of the game, but that I got bored because the AI was too predictable. After a while you learn the how the AI works and it feels like a set of triggers mechanisms with a small RNG attached to it.
Personally I think the tactical combat AI in Civ needs help from chess programmers. The tactical AI in Civ would be greatly increased if a unit could do what was smartest thinking no steps a head and only considering tiles 3 steps away. If they made it able to think 1 or 2 turns into the future and 4 tiles in each direction the game would be changer completely.
Do you mean this should only be used for the macro AI or also for detailed management? I think it could work with on a macro level, but the biggest flaws in the game are on a more tactical level. Doesn't matter if the AI triggers "Attack Jharii with 73% of your land units at his left flank" at the perfect timing if all he does is to suicide his units.
When was the last time you played Europa Universalis III? The game has been repeatedly patched. At the start it was truly bad, but this far in it's very, very good. And not just on combat, either. It can form interesting alliances, and even negotiate reasonably well at the conclusion of wars.
I'd suggest two other titles for consideration:
1) Distant Worlds.
2) Europa Univeralis III.
Both have excellent AI.
....
Would that were possible! -But chess AIs are so good because of enormous databases in the ability to look at them while the other player is making his/her move. Civ (and other strategy games) lack the databases, as well as the ability to look at analyze when it's the player's turn. Sadly.
As I mentioned, it is a long time since I played it. If the AI has improved, then that's great, but it was horrible when I played it.When was the last time you played Europa Universalis III? The game has been repeatedly patched. At the start it was truly bad, but this far in it's very, very good. And not just on combat, either. It can form interesting alliances, and even negotiate reasonably well at the conclusion of wars.
I'm not talking about a DeepBlue style AI. Chess AIs from the 80ties are better at combat than the Civ 5, and if they are looking 1 turn a head they wouldn't need to look at all possible outcomes but have a simple evaluation function for the state. But as I mentioned, even looking 0 turns into the future would be an improvement if they were able to evaluate moves and positions better. I have seen situations where the enemy has their artillery in a good position to shoot and kill my unit while they instead chose to move into the grassland tile in front of my rifleman... I can't even imagine how it's possible to program an AI to consider that a good move.Would that were possible! -But chess AIs are so good because of enormous databases in the ability to look at them while the other player is making his/her move. Civ (and other strategy games) lack the databases, as well as the ability to look at analyze when it's the player's turn. Sadly.
It is of course impossible to evaluate all possible moves, but it should be possible to evaluate the most realistic end states in a local area. Giving bonuses for damaging enemies, giving penalties for exposed ranged units and so on.True. And even with a database and the willingness to use it during the players turn the massive (and unique) map, the fact that all units can move every turn, the element of chance in combat, etc. really limit the capacity to look deeply at the situation. I wonder how many possible moves there are in turn 100 of the average Civ4 game?
I can't even imagine how it's possible to program an AI to consider that a good move.
specially with the current development team...
Soren, on the other hand... maybe, just maybe...
chessmaster