RegentMan
Deity
I agree, I would like to see less instances of a spearman taking out my cavalry, but this way adds extra spice. You need to take along extras just in case something happens...
Combat Cheats by the AI
- Thread starter arretium
- Start date
Nomalized... Are we asuming that they do not normalize the results? Or do we have in fomration to that effect? I had assumed that they would take the raw RNG and normalize it -- that is what I do when I write a "dice-roll". If they use it raw, it is no wonder we get such skewed results.
The game is, and we play the game as is... I just like to know what is going on.
The game is, and we play the game as is... I just like to know what is going on.
Mark Young
Formerly Sir Eric
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2003
- Messages
- 1,799
eh..... thanks.....I think.
I work with animals for a living so my maths is probably not as good as yours, could you explain what that picture means or at least put some dogs or cats in the picture so I can try to understand it. Thanks
I work with animals for a living so my maths is probably not as good as yours, could you explain what that picture means or at least put some dogs or cats in the picture so I can try to understand it. Thanks
Hellfire
Prince
Hellfire's treatise on "cheating"
First, anyone who says a computer is "cheating" is insensed by results they did not like in the game. This is an immature response to basically not getting things your way. I'm sorry if this comes off nasty but its true. But its very important to say... why?
Computers and computer games are emotionless, they don't cheat!!!
Computer games are "designed." They are designed with discrete mathematical and logical properties. Either they do A or B, or they chose from a list of A thru Z. They are designed to provide a challenge to the person playing the game.
Sometimes those rules are complex. Civilization is an extremely complex game, despite the good efforts at Firaxis to make the over all gameplay simplified. However, the rules are possible to learn, and once you have a knowledge of at least some, if not most of the rules, things begin to make sense.
"Cheating" also implies gains that some how work out for the "cheater." Since a computer has nothing to gain by "cheating" then there must be something to gain for the programmers to gain by the application "cheating." There is nothing to be gained by developers by making a game "cheat" and the only true "cheat" would be if you were somehow investing money in games and the developers made you lose and this cost you money. This is utterly ludicrous since no current computer games involve this type of gambling. In fact game makers want to engage you to show the game has worth. Some people may smash on their keyboards in frustration, but for the most part most game players don't. Anger is more often the exception, not the rule, in game playing.
If you want to address something in a game you think is unfair, tackle the problem as a functional design or logical design issue, or even a bug, but not a "cheat." Everything that the programmers put in is deliberate functionality, including the so called "AI knows where all your units are" functionality. Its not a "cheat," its a feature, and its designed to make the game a little more challenging. If you disagree, say you disagree with the functionality and work to have it changed. This way you are speaking the language of the programmers. Saying a game is cheating makes it that much harder to try to address the issue.
Same goes for bugs. The only thing about bugs is that they weren't ment to go into the code, so the best thing is to try to address why the bug is there and see if it contradicts what the programmers intended, or, if the documentation is any good, see if it contradicts the documentation (don't do this for Civ3! The manual blows!).
Finally, just remember that you yourself have a huge "cheat" over any AI. As a human, you are far more creative than any other computer or game. That is proven by all the wealth of information and strategy given at this site. Do not discount your own ability to actually kick any computer's ass. Some games are designed by the programmers to be harder than other. Not everyone is very good at solving a Rubix Cube or a Chinese box, and if you aren't willing to invest the time, that's fine. No one will think you are a bad person. However, if you jump into a game, and in 5 minutes throw down your mouse and accuse the game of cheating, all you will have done is shown everyone your own maturity level, gained no sympathy, and you would have not solved your problem.
First, anyone who says a computer is "cheating" is insensed by results they did not like in the game. This is an immature response to basically not getting things your way. I'm sorry if this comes off nasty but its true. But its very important to say... why?
Computers and computer games are emotionless, they don't cheat!!!
Computer games are "designed." They are designed with discrete mathematical and logical properties. Either they do A or B, or they chose from a list of A thru Z. They are designed to provide a challenge to the person playing the game.
Sometimes those rules are complex. Civilization is an extremely complex game, despite the good efforts at Firaxis to make the over all gameplay simplified. However, the rules are possible to learn, and once you have a knowledge of at least some, if not most of the rules, things begin to make sense.
"Cheating" also implies gains that some how work out for the "cheater." Since a computer has nothing to gain by "cheating" then there must be something to gain for the programmers to gain by the application "cheating." There is nothing to be gained by developers by making a game "cheat" and the only true "cheat" would be if you were somehow investing money in games and the developers made you lose and this cost you money. This is utterly ludicrous since no current computer games involve this type of gambling. In fact game makers want to engage you to show the game has worth. Some people may smash on their keyboards in frustration, but for the most part most game players don't. Anger is more often the exception, not the rule, in game playing.
If you want to address something in a game you think is unfair, tackle the problem as a functional design or logical design issue, or even a bug, but not a "cheat." Everything that the programmers put in is deliberate functionality, including the so called "AI knows where all your units are" functionality. Its not a "cheat," its a feature, and its designed to make the game a little more challenging. If you disagree, say you disagree with the functionality and work to have it changed. This way you are speaking the language of the programmers. Saying a game is cheating makes it that much harder to try to address the issue.
Same goes for bugs. The only thing about bugs is that they weren't ment to go into the code, so the best thing is to try to address why the bug is there and see if it contradicts what the programmers intended, or, if the documentation is any good, see if it contradicts the documentation (don't do this for Civ3! The manual blows!).
Finally, just remember that you yourself have a huge "cheat" over any AI. As a human, you are far more creative than any other computer or game. That is proven by all the wealth of information and strategy given at this site. Do not discount your own ability to actually kick any computer's ass. Some games are designed by the programmers to be harder than other. Not everyone is very good at solving a Rubix Cube or a Chinese box, and if you aren't willing to invest the time, that's fine. No one will think you are a bad person. However, if you jump into a game, and in 5 minutes throw down your mouse and accuse the game of cheating, all you will have done is shown everyone your own maturity level, gained no sympathy, and you would have not solved your problem.
Originally posted by RegentMan
I agree, I would like to see less instances of a spearman taking out my cavalry, but this way adds extra spice. You need to take along extras just in case something happens...
that is exatcly what I meant when I said 'favours' - extra to what? extra to what any human would intuitively do........
I agree, once you are really into it it is fine... but that took me several months and a LOT of frustrationg experiences......
I am glad to see we understand each other after all
barron of ideas
Barron
Can we continue to discuss the random number generator, and the suggestion the results be normalized. Does this mean you would rather have more dice rolls coming up 3 and 4 than 1 and 6? If so, why? I admit if you throw two dice you are far more likey to get a sum of 7 than two or twelve, but as a long time avalon hill game player, where the crt wants 1s for victory, or 6s if you can get 3 to 1 odds, and 3 and 4 tend to be attacker or defender back, I would much rather see 1s and 6s. Mostly 1s.
