is the braindead AI going to be solved???

[Tanan Fujiwara]

Well I just finished playing my second game with the hardest settings and options possible and I'm in no doubt now that the AI is braindead... It was a walk in the park!!![>:][>:][>:]

Actually it became quite amusing to see the amount of senseless DoW's the AI kept declaring without any logic behind them, and afterwards it just stood there and did nothing to bring those wars to an end.[&:]

The AI makes stupid moves and comits the Corps to piecemeal attacks constantly, and that if you are lucky, because most of the time it just sits there and waits doing nothing, even if it was the one who declared war in the first place. And to top it off, the diplomacy between major powers is non existant and there is no way to actualy now what stance each major power has towards the others.

So my question is: will matrix games do something about the braindead AI???, because if that's not the case the game is definitly of no use for solo play, and if that is the case and what we have here is a pbem game only then I really don't understand the price of the game.[&:][&:]

[Erik Rutins]

People are reporting varying experiences with the AI and we're listening. As soon as the first update is out to address critical issues and bugs, we'll be looking at ongoing AI improvements as the top priority.

[DodgyDave]

Tanan, i agree AI is funny and stupid but i like the game, waiting for more games to start up, so to play more with other players until the AI works properly, as i suspect those pbem games are slow lol

[ravinhood]

Tanan you ought to know by now that most games out of the box or upon release have issues out the Ying Yang. You certainly can't expect the AI to be tip top ship shape at the get go. I certainly am not and will be waiting on futher reviews of it as patches come out. From my experience the majority of games need at least 3 patches before the game and the AI is up to at least fair. So, sit back relax play something else (WitP should keep you occupied for awhile) and wait on the patches.

[Tanan Fujiwara]

Well you might be right ravinhood, I don't know much about pc games really, since the only ones I buy and play are, for the most part, boardgames that have been passed on to computer. The reason behind this is mainly solo play, since I don't have as much time as I did before to join in with other people to play (wife, kids, work...). I still play ocasionally with a group of friends and I'm up and running in two cyberboard campaigns... so my main interest in this game was basically solo play.
 
Don't get me wrong, the game looks quite nice (I didn't expected to be so close to the actual boardgame) and allthough is a bit unfriendly it has a lot of potential. I just feel disapointed because I expected a bit more out of the AI, but as you say and  from what matrix has published, I'll sit tight and wait for the upgrades.
 
My best

[Artmiser]

Sadly ravinhood I can remember when games came out that were complete out of the box.  Has not happened in years.

[ravinhood]

Oh I know Artmiser I've been on that soapbox for years. But, in Matrixgames case these NEW games they are producing they do put plenty of time into after release. This is probably one of there more exceptional to the norm for their releases, but, I fully expect them to still support this one until it's actually in fair/good shape. One could easily see from the posts it was released in PBEM mode and not so much solo play. Once they get the PBEM mode up and going in better condition then they'll start to work on the AI as Erik has stated.

I'm a bit more lenient on Matrixgames releases than I am Paradox because Paradox has smart ass Admins and Moderators at their site that pretty much impose THEIR way and threaten banning everytime you have issues with their games. For instance there's an issue going on over at the CK/Dues Vult forum which I was involved in concerning the pledging system. Not only did the moderator cut my OPINION short with threat of banning, but, also the main admin after I carried my opinon futher. Just goes to show Matrixgames has a more open forum (though there are times we all cross the line), but, Paradox is too gestapoishlike and forces the forum to run a particular way and by orders. If I like a FEATURE within a game I don't want some moderator or admin telling me I can't like it because 9 other people on the forum don't. Or be told (and I was told) I can't express my opinion to the fact while others can. Grosshaus over there is a real pip. lol That's why I enjoy Matrixgames site so much. I have the freedom to express myself and only occassionally do some things get out of hand. But, at least Erik et al let me have my say, I don't hear the ban word after every other opinion here.

[MilRevKo]

This is a PBEM game. We will not see a computer program that is capable fighting against humans at this level of complexity in our life times. The utilization of income, manpower, military production, strategy, intuition, and diplomacy (stabbing a person in the back is still diplomacy) are beyond the silicon chip at this point.

Probably better for mankind this way...

--
Utinam populus romanus unam cervicem haberet!

[John Neal]

Yes, as this game was designed to follow a board game, i would think it would be very difficult to design an AI that could compete with an experienced human player.

Different topic:
This game would be wild with a 'we go' movement system, where all units move at the same time. Somehow i doubt the system would work, but wonder in that case, would the AI logic be easier?

[SkyElf]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Oh I know Artmiser I've been on that soapbox for years. But, in Matrixgames case these NEW games they are producing they do put plenty of time into after release. This is probably one of there more exceptional to the norm for their releases, but, I fully expect them to still support this one until it's actually in fair/good shape. One could easily see from the posts it was released in PBEM mode and not so much solo play. Once they get the PBEM mode up and going in better condition then they'll start to work on the AI as Erik has stated.

I'm a bit more lenient on Matrixgames releases than I am Paradox because Paradox has smart ass Admins and Moderators at their site that pretty much impose THEIR way and threaten banning everytime you have issues with their games. For instance there's an issue going on over at the CK/Dues Vult forum which I was involved in concerning the pledging system. Not only did the moderator cut my OPINION short with threat of banning, but, also the main admin after I carried my opinon futher. Just goes to show Matrixgames has a more open forum (though there are times we all cross the line), but, Paradox is too gestapoishlike and forces the forum to run a particular way and by orders. If I like a FEATURE within a game I don't want some moderator or admin telling me I can't like it because 9 other people on the forum don't. Or be told (and I was told) I can't express my opinion to the fact while others can. Grosshaus over there is a real pip. lol That's why I enjoy Matrixgames site so much. I have the freedom to express myself and only occassionally do some things get out of hand. But, at least Erik et al let me have my say, I don't hear the ban word after every other opinion here.

I agree that Paradox Moderators are very pompus at times in some forums. We all have are opinion on various games from them, and as long as we keep from name calling. Wait very patiently for there updates that are due from 2 plus years now on HOI2 and there expansions with same problems being carried over and over. Enough on that subject.

[zaquex]

ORIGINAL: MilRevKo

This is a PBEM game. We will not see a computer program that is capable fighting against humans at this level of complexity in our life times. The utilization of income, manpower, military production, strategy, intuition, and diplomacy (stabbing a person in the back is still diplomacy) are beyond the silicon chip at this point.

Probably better for mankind this way...

--
Utinam populus romanus unam cervicem haberet!

I think its very possible to make a system that makes playing against the AI challenging, it would take a fair bit of effort and a clever design but i would say its very possible even though human players always would be prefered.

[Grognot]

This game would be wild with a 'we go' movement system, where all units move at the same time. Somehow i doubt the system would work, but wonder in that case, would the AI logic be easier?

Even assuming that the rules were trivially modifiable to permit it in an non-unbalancing fashion (and I wouldn't bet on it!), it would likely be harder -- provided that it was true 'we go', and not an asymmetric situation in which the human must give orders blind to the AI orders, but the AI cheats by knowing what the human's orders are before giving its "simultaneous" orders (*). You're making the problem more complex in terms of hidden information... and bear in mind that the AI isn't being programmed by a team of researchers using a massive computer cluster.


(*) Info-cheats are common. 'Shogun: Total War' did this extremely blatantly -- its "simultaneous" orders would actually change based on what orders you gave. This was defended by its fans as 'spying', but the in-game intelligence available to the player was never remotely as good no matter how much the player invested in espionage or counterespionage -- the human player was normally given vague alleged objectives to take place many turns later, and which would change dramatically on a turn-by-turn basis (and often never be attempted), rather than the actual moves. I say this as a player who experimented to the point of filling entire provinces with spies -- that is, there was no more room in a province to put more units.

[ETF]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

I'm a bit more lenient on Matrixgames releases than I am Paradox because Paradox has smart ass Admins and Moderators at their site that pretty much impose THEIR way and threaten banning everytime you have issues with their games. For instance there's an issue going on over at the CK/Dues Vult forum which I was involved in concerning the pledging system. Not only did the moderator cut my OPINION short with threat of banning, but, also the main admin after I carried my opinon futher. Just goes to show Matrixgames has a more open forum (though there are times we all cross the line), but, Paradox is too gestapoishlike and forces the forum to run a particular way and by orders. If I like a FEATURE within a game I don't want some moderator or admin telling me I can't like it because 9 other people on the forum don't. Or be told (and I was told) I can't express my opinion to the fact while others can. Grosshaus over there is a real pip. lol That's why I enjoy Matrixgames site so much. I have the freedom to express myself and only occassionally do some things get out of hand. But, at least Erik et al let me have my say, I don't hear the ban word after every other opinion here.

Hmm sorry to hear that Ravin.........I have found the Paradox Forums quite enjoyable. You are correct they are moderated more so than Matrix. Not sure if that is always a bad thing [:D]

[ETF]

ORIGINAL: Tainan Fujiyama

Well I just finished playing my second game with the hardest settings and options possible and I'm in no doubt now that the AI is braindead... It was a walk in the park!!![>:][>:][>:]

Actually it became quite amusing to see the amount of senseless Dow's the AI kept declaring without any logic behind them, and afterwords it just stood there and did nothing to bring those wars to an end.[&:]

The AI makes stupid moves and commits the Corps to piecemeal attacks constantly, and that if you are lucky, because most of the time it just sits there and waits doing nothing, even if it was the one who declared war in the first place. And to top it off, the diplomacy between major powers is non existent and there is no way to actually now what stance each major power has to wards the others.

So my question is: will matrix games do something about the brain dead AI???, because if that's not the case the game is definitely of no use for solo play, and if that is the case and what we have here is a poem game only then I really don't understand the price of the game.[&:][&:]

All the more reason to have a decent MP lobby and TCP/IP support. Do you really think these small war game publishers can actually produce a decent AI? I have never seen one yet in 20 years of computer war gaming. I wish they would take their AI programming money and work with a modern PBEM ie WE GO or better yet a TCP/IP - Matrix Lobby.
The AI should be relegated to Tutorial scenarios only IMHO.

[hakon]

Actually, Civ IV had a fairly decent AI, iirc. So it IS possible to create strong AI for wargame-like games. I'm not saying it's easy, though.

[Mynok]

Civilization is vasty less complicated game than EiA. There will NEVER be an AI for this game that is good for anything more than training until we have true artificial intelligence.

[yammahoper]

I think this game is really designed for TCP/IP.   I have several local friends to play with, and we would even LAN a few campaigns twice a year or so.  The way thr program handles all the math is nice.
 
But first fix the bugs.  It is so not cool to enter a naval battle, the screen flashes, no battle, and I am back to the normal map to learn the battle resolved itself, or never even occured, but my ships are where I left them and still able to move.  Weird stuff that would really suck in a LAN game.
 
yamma

[ETF]

ORIGINAL: hakon

Actually, Civ IV had a fairly decent AI, iirc. So it IS possible to create strong AI for wargame-like games. I'm not saying it's easy, though.

Well not sure what your definition of Fairly decent is. But for a multimillion dollar game I think it is quite poor.....Unless you think a Cheating AI is decent [;)]

[ETF]

ORIGINAL: yammahoper@yahoo.com

I think this game is really designed for TCP/IP.  

Agreed............forget about trying to band-aid an AI that at best will only entertain beginners.

[Jimmer]

I do one thing that makes it a bit more of a challenge (a SMALL bit). The AI tends to send out small armies (frequently, only one corps). To offset that, I make a "rule" that I follow when at war: Never overstack one of my leaders. This way, at least they have a chance, at least against everybody except France. So, Nappy never takes more than six corps into battle.
 
I'm almost to the point where I'm going to change it to "Never go above half (rounded up) of the corps counter limit of a leader". So, Blucher won't take more than three corps into battle.