Armchair generals. Is it possible to learn strategy in books? Is it possible a competent AI?

[Joseignacio]

ORIGINAL: DCWhitworth

If the game is intended to have an AI it should have one on release.

I'm sure the developers genuinely intend to produce one in the future. However once the game is released they will be spending pretty much all their time fixing bugs which is 'essential' whereas producing an AI will be a 'nice to have' feature and will always take second place.

I can also bet they'll be fixing more bugs than they thought they would be.

ORIGINAL: Sarge

lol

For thousands of years military collages from every conceivable civilization armed with immeasurable accumulative knowledge have utterly failed in producing a simplistic AI temp plate : if this happens do this!




So …………what’s the hold up ?

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio


No, they succeeded from the first time they tried, it just happens that thos who need to do as the book says are humans, and with a different background and training, and sometimes it works, sometimes not.

ORIGINAL: Sarge

Really,

What chapter is that nugget in ……………………….[8|]

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

http://www.priceminister.es/offer/buy/4 ... Libro.html

http://www.priceminister.es/offer/buy/4 ... Libro.html

http://www.priceminister.es/offer/buy/4 ... Libro.html

but there are some much older:

http://www.clausewitz.com/readings/Principles/

http://www.icollector.com/Military-Tact ... -_i8702773

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Book_of_Five_Rings

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War

are the first tactics and strategy books that come to my head. Maybe you can get some hints...[8|]

ORIGINAL: Sarge

Well some of us actually have practical real experience in the field, some play video games and read Art Of War and think they have some insight.

My advice is move on straw man you'll get your AI when its done try to relax its just a game ...........[>:]

ORIGINAL: DCWhitworth


Granted there is no substitute for practical experience but there are other ways to acquire knowledge on the subject.

ORIGINAL: Sarge



Don’t let straw man above confuse my original point....[;)]

ORIGINAL: Sarge

lol

For thousands of years military collages from every conceivable civilization armed with immeasurable accumulative knowledge have utterly failed in producing a simplistic AI temp plate : if this happens do this!

So …………what’s the hold up ?

ORIGINAL: DCWhitworth



I think the issue is that real life is an immeasurably boundless and complex thing wheras computer programs have relatively limited horizons and certainly can't *think* outside the box. A further issue is that computers do not think like humans so trying to get them to behave like them is doubly hard.

But actually you'd hit similar issues if you gave a list of written instructions/advice to a human who applied them literally and without initiative.

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

First, I have been a soldier, reaching the graduation of Cabo Primero, don't know the translation but it would be like "first class corporal", the higher level in our army under sargent, however, I have not been professional, that I must admit.

Anyway, that has nothing to do with what we are writing about. I think that most of the generals who were the High Commands in the II WW had probably never been in a real front.

This is a simulation, and we are armchair generals, maybe any of us could be as good as Montgomery, Auchinleck or Rommel, but most wont. If the books were good to learn tactics and strategy for romans (Cursus Honorum included them if I am not wrong) ,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cursus_honorum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribune#Ro ... y_officers

cartaginese and chinese officers among others, I think they must be valuabe no matter that, as Moltke said "No plan of operations extends with certainty beyond the first encounter with the enemy's main strength (no plan survives contact with the enemy).",

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmuth_vo ... _the_Elder

the course of action has to be decided before, and the better the planification, the possible alternatives coverture and setting of reserves and retreat coverture measures, the better the result will be if something results wrong.

Surely you don-t believe, Alexander, Hannibal, Julius Caesar, ..., just imagined their tactics or lost enough legions till they learnt that it was not good to cross a river and leave it behind in the presence of the enemy. They were taught, with senior officers or their writings in books.

[morgil]

Basic tactics is quite easy to learn, you get that from Sun Tzu among others. But to be a successful general in a battle, there are many other factors involved, most of which can't be learned so easily. Like people skills, observational skills, and ofcourse luck.

If you took the greatest millitary minds and pooled all theire knowledge in a computer, there would still be something missing. Because sometimes the world just fails to be binary. If you program the computer to take care of human life, it would not fight a war, it would surrender. Unless the opponent will kill everybody anyway, in which case, a 2 to 1 assault on a fortified city in rain is just as good an option.

[Hokum]

Anyway, that has nothing to do with what we are writing about. I think that most of the generals who were the High Commands in the II WW had probably never been in a real front.

Most did, actually. But then again, experience you gained from this differed from one to another, and real battles/war are far too complex to simulate accurately (and depend a good lot on what got decided earlier by different men).

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Hokum

Anyway, that has nothing to do with what we are writing about. I think that most of the generals who were the High Commands in the II WW had probably never been in a real front.

Most did, actually. But then again, experience you gained from this differed from one to another, and real battles/war are far too complex to simulate accurately (and depend a good lot on what got decided earlier by different men).

Two markedly different paths to leadership are Rommel's (in the field) and Eisenhower's (in the HQ).

[composer99]

More to the point it does not follow that real-life battlefield experience (especially at the tactical/small-unit level which is what I assume Sarge is talking about) necessarily translates into being good at playing an abstracted strategic-level war game.

[Sarge]

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio
Surely you don-t believe, Alexander, Hannibal, Julius Caesar, ..., just imagined their tactics or lost enough legions till they learnt that it was not good to cross a river and leave it behind in the presence of the enemy. They were taught, with senior officers or their writings in books.

Alexander, Hannibal, Julius Caesar why stop there.

For every example of the “book” you put forth (vague as they are ) even the trivial history buff here can surly contradict ,but truly that proves nothing for ether case.

In the right context as in the class room Art Of War most certainly in the has it merits, but translating the “book” into a literal To Do List as your implying above would be disasters on all scales of warfare , In the tactical setting : improvisation takes the field and on the flip side : at the root of all mistakes is a assumption……..read Hannibal

In a strategic setting I would have to agree you’ll have the luxury of lead time which translates into a more common sense approach . But again your examples Alexander, Hannibal, Julius Caesar has me confused in exactly which scale your talking about tactical, strategic , operational , World In Flames, Historical conflict ?

Ether way I find it hard to believe your belief is all great commander are simple applying knowledge picked up in the class room ……..its hardly that simplistic





PS: Its called improvisation not imagined …[;)]

[Joseignacio]

First a commercial (humor) on Steve's work:
 
http://dotsub.com/view/a455436c-dc0f-4e2e-a642-8271673277fa

[Jaimainsoyyo]

Que cachondo [:D]