Delnar's AI Cleanup 2016-11-06

[Sacrelicious]

@Delnar_Ersike This is awesome, thanks for your wok on this... any idea how to get it working on a Mac install?

 

[Konfuchie]

Hey Delnar, good to see you at work already in Civ VI. Although currently this mod seems to be broke. I saw this in Modding.log

[124557.762] Status: Applying Component - AICLEANUP_COMPONENT
[124557.762] Status: Creating database save point.
[124557.762] Status: UpdateDatabase - Loading AICleanup_Units.xml
[124557.763] Status: UpdateDatabase - Loading AICleanup_GlobalParameters.xml
[124557.763] Warning: UpdateDatabase - Error Loading XML.
[124557.763] Status: UpdateDatabase - Loading AICleanup_Leaders.xml
[124557.764] Warning: UpdateDatabase - Error Loading XML.
[124557.764] Status: UpdateDatabase - Loading AICleanup_Victories
[124557.764] Warning: UpdateDatabase - Could not load file. Unknown extension.
[124557.764] Status: Successfully released save point.
[124557.764] Status: Applied component to game.

So to fix these, in the .modinfo file you reference AICleanup_Victories twice but doesn't have its extension

<File>AICleanup_Victories</File> <-- causes error
<File>AICleanup_Victories.xml</File> <-- fixed

In GlobalParameters and Leaders, you have update blocks but forgot some slashes in all of them

Error:
<Update>
     <Where Name="AI_CURRENT_TASK_BIAS">
     <Set Value="50">
</Update>

Fixed:
<Update>
     <Where Name="AI_CURRENT_TASK_BIAS"/>
     <Set Value="50"/>
</Update>

Mod seems to load correctly once all these fixes are made.

You guys are confusing me does this mod work or not? And can I use it with MadDjinn's awesome tech-tree mod?

 

[RushSecond]

No, it doesn't work until Delnar updates it. I got it working for myself only by making those changes, but the download link still has the broken version.

 

[Delnar_Ersike]

Mod has been updated to v2, thanks RushSecond and qqqbbb for the heads up with errors, and thanks notque for the Varu thing and for the hours-long chats on Discord. Check the full changelog for details, but let's just say that I'm probably not going to do any more BehaviorTree modding until the SDK is out.

 

[Zero0018]

The mod prevents the AI from expanding. Was playing a game with a friend and got up to 200 turns and noticed every civ only had one city. They also wouldn't declare war or attack anything.

Later on tested multiple times. AI will build settlers and do nothing with them. See pics

http://imgur.com/3z1qnn6
http://imgur.com/VOfugv1
http://imgur.com/4zNkF9Y

 

[notque]

I think I can guess why. Let me validate.

 

[notque]

The mod prevents the AI from expanding. Was playing a game with a friend and got up to 200 turns and noticed every civ only had one city. They also wouldn't declare war or attack anything.

Later on tested multiple times. AI will build settlers and do nothing with them. See pics

http://imgur.com/3z1qnn6
http://imgur.com/VOfugv1
http://imgur.com/4zNkF9Y

Remove this from AICleanupOperations

<Delete ListType="BaseOperationsLimits" Item="OP_SETTLE" />

I bet that fixes it.

.... I would have went with updating it to 2, instead of 1 instead of deleting it. Need to hear from Delnar to see what he was thinking. If you want to test my "2" thing, you can.

 

[callmewoof]

Not counting the settler bug mentioned in the above posts, it sounds like this mod changes the AI into an ICS nightmare. They already get 3 settlers on deity (my play level), I can only imagine them with their +80% productivity bonus having a hard-on for new cities. Am I reading it wrong?

 

[thesacrifist]

Settler bug still seems to be there even with deleting the <Delete ListType="BaseOperationsLimits" Item="OP_SETTLE" />

Despite that - thank you IMMENSELY all involved for your work on this, makes the game so much better!

 

[Delnar_Ersike]

The BaseOperationsLimits line shouldn't do that: there are no limits on barbarian attack operations, so removing limits for settling ones would make them have the same limit as barbarian attacks, and we know that barbarian attacks happen all the time.

If anything, it's probably me misunderstanding how pseudoyields work. For v4, I'll shift the increased pseudoyield to go through a permanent favoredlist item instead of adjusting the default yield, see if that fixes it.

Not counting the settler bug mentioned in the above posts, it sounds like this mod changes the AI into an ICS nightmare. They already get 3 settlers on deity (my play level), I can only imagine them with their +80% productivity bonus having a hard-on for new cities. Am I reading it wrong?

Nope, you're reading it right. The game enables ICS with its terrible settler production cost scaling and amenities distribution algorithm, and even incentivizes it in the case of the hilarious Harvest Boom strategy notque and I discussed in private (short version: be India, beeline Research Labs but pick up Varu on the way for effective defense, send out scouts to get enough faith for a pantheon quickly, get Harvest pantheon, build a ton of builders, use Research Labs beeline to shoot through eras, exploit the ridiculous scaling of harvest yields with eras, get giant amounts of yields from harvesting bonus resources, use faith from harvests to buy all the GPs to fuel your harvest engine, ICS to get more territory to get more tiles to harvest, rapid-build a shitton of districts because of ridiculous yields from harvests + having all the GPs, boom to win... it's hilarious because it goes against every bit of muscle memory from Civ5 by just slashing and burning bonus resource tiles instead of buffing the tiles themselves, but the math checks out and it definitely works in multiplayer). If ICS is not just allowed but incentivized in Civ6, and the AI is supposed to play the game well, then why should it not ICS?

 

[Zero0018]

Nope. Still broke. Both civs have 2 settlers just chilling in the borders.

http://imgur.com/zdEHpBU

 

[Delnar_Ersike]

Nope. Still broke. Both civs have 2 settlers just chilling in the borders.

http://imgur.com/zdEHpBU

Looks like they're both waiting for escorts. It's probably a problem present in vanilla, but it didn't surface until I removed the restriction on settlers and made the AI build more. I've got a feeling I'll have to start dealing with the operation's behavior tree, ugh...

EDIT: Turns out I don't think I need to, hopefully fixed in v5. As an added bonus, the AI can use Scouts and Rangers to escort settlers, too, so settlers are more likely to be sent out now.

 

[Zero0018]

Looks like they're both waiting for escorts. It's probably a problem present in vanilla, but it didn't surface until I removed the restriction on settlers and made the AI build more. I've got a feeling I'll have to start dealing with the operation's behavior tree, ugh...

EDIT: Turns out I don't think I need to, hopefully fixed in v5. As an added bonus, the AI can use Scouts and Rangers to escort settlers, too, so settlers are more likely to be sent out now.

Okay. I tested the game on deity with no mods and by turn 30 every civ has 3 cities. With your mod they just sit in town.

Nice. Hopefully it's fixed because I like the changes the mod makes other wise

 

[SuperSylph]

Looks like they're both waiting for escorts. It's probably a problem present in vanilla, but it didn't surface until I removed the restriction on settlers and made the AI build more. I've got a feeling I'll have to start dealing with the operation's behavior tree, ugh...

EDIT: Turns out I don't think I need to, hopefully fixed in v5. As an added bonus, the AI can use Scouts and Rangers to escort settlers, too, so settlers are more likely to be sent out now.

Fairly sure the settler problem still exists. If the difficulty gives the AI free settlers at the start, it doesn't move them, and if it doesn't get free ones, it doesn't build any. Ran several autoplay AI only games.

 

[Zero0018]

Fairly sure the settler problem still exists. If the difficulty gives the AI free settlers at the start, it doesn't move them, and if it doesn't get free ones, it doesn't build any. Ran several autoplay AI only games.

So annoying! Why does every single civ game have god awful AI? Ugh. It's so frustrating.

 

[Delnar_Ersike]

Fairly sure the settler problem still exists. If the difficulty gives the AI free settlers at the start, it doesn't move them, and if it doesn't get free ones, it doesn't build any. Ran several autoplay AI only games.

Alright, did a proper sweep-through, the bug is actually fixed in v6. It was a byproduct of the command I used to delete the old move order; it turns out the command was a lot more generic than I thought, so it wiped out the moves used by settlers, too.

So annoying! Why does every single civ game have god awful AI? Ugh. It's so frustrating.

The shortest answer is that Firaxis/2K can't afford to pay people who know enough about AI to make a good one, especially when these programmers would have to work more hours as well (compared to working at a place like Microsoft or Tesla).

 

[Xaviarlol]

Alright, did a proper sweep-through, the bug is actually fixed in v6. It was a byproduct of the command I used to delete the old move order; it turns out the command was a lot more generic than I thought, so it wiped out the moves used by settlers, too.


The shortest answer is that Firaxis/2K can't afford to pay people who know enough about AI to make a good one, especially when these programmers would have to work more hours as well (compared to working at a place like Microsoft or Tesla).

CPP / Vox Populi proved that it was achievable to make a tactical AI that can shape up effectively against a human player. I am very annoyed that Firaxis didn't learn from this in Civ 6. If modders can achieve so much, why can't firaxis do it? Unfathomable.

This is probably achievable with one highly skilled AI programmer - Surely they can afford that? I for one would be more than happy to pay for an AI DLC that makes them good. Bad AI virtually ruins the entire game.

 

[Zero0018]

CPP / Vox Populi proved that it was achievable to make a tactical AI that can shape up effectively against a human player. I am very annoyed that Firaxis didn't learn from this in Civ 6. If modders can achieve so much, why can't firaxis do it? Unfathomable.

This is probably achievable with one highly skilled AI programmer - Surely they can afford that? I for one would be more than happy to pay for an AI DLC that makes them good. Bad AI virtually ruins the entire game.

I couldn't agree more. It's baffling. They finally managed to get a game that works with multiplayer mods that doesn't de-sync every 5-10 turns, but they still just don't give a **** about the AI. The AI in this version with the description Delnar gave above makes me cringe. The communitas group that did the mod for civ 5 made the AI so much better, as much as it could be. I really hope they allow mod makers to truly edit the AI and make it not ****, because I also agree, bad AI makes me not even wanna play it. What's the point if you can't have a challenge.

 

[Littlebob86]

And it's more important now than ever due to needing strategic layout of districts and buildings for maximum benefit . . Although they do get their huge boosts to everything

 

[Delnar_Ersike]

CPP / Vox Populi proved that it was achievable to make a tactical AI that can shape up effectively against a human player. I am very annoyed that Firaxis didn't learn from this in Civ 6. If modders can achieve so much, why can't firaxis do it? Unfathomable.

This is probably achievable with one highly skilled AI programmer - Surely they can afford that? I for one would be more than happy to pay for an AI DLC that makes them good. Bad AI virtually ruins the entire game.

An average videogame programmer earns roughly 100k USD a year and gets treated like dirt. An AI expert can easily ask for 200k per year, and if Firaxis/2K start giving them lip, they can easily jump ship to a company that doesn't treat them terribly (Google, Facebook, and Intel are always on the lookout for this kind of talent); in real terms, this usually means that if said expert would have to work the same schedules as videogame programmers, they would actually ask for something around 300k per year at least (this includes overtime and crunch that is standard for videogame development). For that price, 2K can just hire two generic programmers to make a superficial OK-looking AI (people don't really have high expectations), spend a bunch on a celebrity voice actors who players will immediately recognize to sell more copies, and still have money left over.

Most AI experts work best when they're working with neural networking architectures (also called "deep learning" by marketing people). In fact, even when such architectures aren't used, being able to rely on heuristics and a static ruleset makes all AI programmers' lives easier; this is why CPP was able to get its decent AI through 4+ years' of work from 2+N programmers (2 main as Gazebo and Ilteroi, N supplement/groundwork as ninakoru, notque, and myself to name a couple), since BNW had a well-established system for unit control. However, all of this goes out the window for a game in active development: fundamental rules can change on a weekly basis, possibly invalidating months' work of neural net training and heuristic development. As such, I would estimate that even with good AI programmers, developing a good AI for a Civ game would require having at least two of said programmers work on the AI from the start of the development cycle. If we are to take Civ6 as an example, it has been in development roughly since the release of Civ5. That's 6 years' development x 2 programmers x 300k USD per year = 3.6M USD extra just spent on AI development... and that's not counting the extra overhead and management costs for a dedicated AI development system. There are way better returns on a 3.6M USD investment for 2K than employing dedicated AI programmers.