1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Listening to Polycast 129...

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Padje Dog, Sep 26, 2011.

  1. Padje Dog

    Padje Dog Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    109
    Just listening to episode 129 of Polycast, the opening discussion on is Civ V worth playing I had a thought on improving the AI's (at a global level) and the game.

    It was said that the AI's DOW the player often, even if there has been a history of "peacefulness". Combine this with there being no real reason to forge long term friendships (combine or is it forced upon the player due to those DOW's?), the game kinda feels like your manipulating some AI's for research agreements and just viewing the rest as AI's that will eventually hate you.

    What the game needs (or more likely what I hope Civ VI will have) is a meta-game history for the player and the AI's, and better in game incentives for co-operation. As the game stands there is only one winner and thus no reason to come second. But if the player and more importantly AI's had a meta-game goal of not winning single games but to have the best average finishing position over a number of games, combined with the in game mechanics that encourage teamwork then you would get the AI's evaluating "hey, this guys doing alright, I'll try and buddy with him to get a second place which is still pretty good".

    At the meta-game level it would provide a number to rank human players and give us something to brag about (but would need some way to stop humans "gaming" the options, maybe humans play ranked games only on continent maps?). It could also provide the AI's opportunity to learn if the game details were uploaded (or am I being too future thinking to believe games companies would not just program AI's but include a way for them to improve against humans to give humans a better experience, especially when game data is available? No skynet jokes please :p )

    Anyway it might be better.....
     
  2. builer680

    builer680 eats too much Taco Bell

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2010
    Messages:
    525
    The Polycast 129 thread is still on page 1. What made you feel you needed to create an entirely new one to talk about it?
     
  3. Padje Dog

    Padje Dog Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    109
    Because its not actually on the Polycast itself but I had hoped for a general discussion on where to take the game. Real life diplomacy does not assume an end game situation but rather a continuation of life and thus sharing and caring is a "good thing". In the Civ series, to differing degree's, it is not.

    And also to air my idea of games companies, especially turn based strategy companies, using the wondrous cloud (cue heavenly choir) to analyze game data and improve the AI's from it. I would not be thinking the 1upt AI but rather things like making the game recognise different human playing arch-types and respond in game, looking at what early to mid game set ups result in what type of human victory and countering that. Also to teach the AI better city specialisation based on available land size and terrain type, I dont see why if literally thousands of completed game data is available for analysis this couldn't be done.

    Ultimately I think the future of gaming AI is that they will make a gaming AI for Civ VI, make it so it can learn (or rather improve upon its strategies via game analysis) and then use that same AI in Civ VII with its improved gameplay. Thus ultimately less time is spent creating an AI (in the long run) and thus companies save money. Certainly for RTS like C&C, Starcraft, Age of Empires ect a generic AI could be developed and improved upon via game analysis that would be better than a stock AI.

    We currently have graphics engines that companies license, why not AI's?
     
  4. builer680

    builer680 eats too much Taco Bell

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2010
    Messages:
    525
    Your title is "Listening to Polycast 129." The title is supposed to be what a thread is about. If you want to discuss changing the game maybe you picked a bad title.
     
  5. Padje Dog

    Padje Dog Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    109
    Feel free to comment on the op if you want.
     
  6. Luckystrike77

    Luckystrike77 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    548
    Location:
    Kingdom of Norway
    People are so naive. Nations are not friends the same way humans are friends. Friendship only last to a certain point, and are always just motivated from selfinterest. You think the european allies loves the USA? No, we are just better of being allies and protected by Pax Americana. Well, for the time being at least. In a 20 years time it might be very different.
     
  7. CoolLizy

    CoolLizy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2001
    Messages:
    631
    Location:
    Kentucky
    The EU is protected by Pax Americana from... what exactly?
     
  8. Luckystrike77

    Luckystrike77 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    548
    Location:
    Kingdom of Norway
    Their grand nuke arsenal and arsenals of every weapon securing oil supplies all over the world for the ones America sees as friends. Just one example.

    One more is the total european dependence on american military communication satelites, and military intelligence.

    The dominant american power has made it hard for other nations to expand their influence in the world after the end of the cold war, but now we see an emerging will and ability from for instance China and Russia to expand their influence over other countries. The same goes for EU members like France and the UK, and all countries in the world that has the abilities. The US has overexpanded it's spheres of influence, and is not able to defend them all over the place any longer, just as the russian-georgian war very clearly showed us.
     
  9. Padje Dog

    Padje Dog Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    109
    Yes but for nations that are not enemies it is better to be pushing towards friendlier ties for trade (both for economic and technology reasons) and lowering the risk of future disputes turning relations to war.

    Because this is a game with only one winner there is no incentive to trade and be friendly with somebody who looks like winning.
     
  10. apocalypse105

    apocalypse105 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    2,704
    Possble threath
     
  11. qemist

    qemist Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2011
    Messages:
    562
    Multiplayer games are like that. You seem to be complaining about the fact the game is a game.
     
  12. Padje Dog

    Padje Dog Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    109
    Aaarrrggghhh!

    Bugger this, I have better things to do.....
     
  13. Camikaze

    Camikaze Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    26,574
    Location:
    Sydney
    Moderator Action: If you don't have anything to contribute to the thread, then don't bother posting in it.
     
  14. CoolLizy

    CoolLizy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2001
    Messages:
    631
    Location:
    Kentucky
    France and Britain have their own nuclear stockpile and arms arsenals, and many European powers have traditionally gotten their oil from nations the US was at serious odds with. Contrary to popular belief, the United States is powerful, but not all-powerful; and Europe, while not as strong in numbers, is certainly not a helpless child.

    Furthermore, "friendly nations" are not usually powered by mutual government self-interest (otherwise the United States and Pakistan would be best buddies), but by the relations of their respective peoples, especially the merchant class. Yes, of course self-interest on the part of politicians and the military plays a part, but it's merely one piece in a much larger whole.

    And really, regardless of the reason two nations would develop a "friendship" in real life, as it is there's not even any reason to be friends with anyone in the game at all. There are very few short or long-term benefits to building an international bond.
     
  15. Le Roi Soleil

    Le Roi Soleil Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    122
    The pax americana is not what it once was.
     

Share This Page