AI improovements

[rfox]

Charles_22: I agree with you for the most part. My only point was that I'm not sure it's possible to "program" an "AI" so that it behaves like a human. I would choose the long WW2 campaign every day of the week and twice on Sunday if it wasn't so, well, predictable (in a certain sense). Also, I enjoy playing qua the Germans so a German long campaign is easy at first against the Polish, etc. In fact, I DO almost always play the long campaign (I have one going right now) as opposed to scenarios over and over again. It would be fantastic if SPWAW had the cartographic skill of the National Geographic staff and the AI of Big Blue, but it is what it is (which isn't all that bad, actually). The great thing about the long campaigns is that they are random, and the tragedy for the AI is that they are random.

One improvement that I was lobbying for and that will be included in v.5.0 is the force pool choices for the computer. Hopefully now, I won't see the computer getting 75% of the entire '41 Polish armor reserves for one relatively small battle. It's interesting when that happens, but completely non-historical. For me, that takes away a lot of the fun. One battle I played seemed more like a turkey shooting excercize than a challenge.

As a side note, I do enjoy a well designed scenario. I view it more as an adventure than boredom. I agree, though, that the replayability of a conquered scenario is limited. Again, my only point there is that you actually have a human mind directing events (I'm not speaking from experience since I've never designed a scenario myself) as opposed to the "blind chance" of the AI in a long campaign. Perhaps one of the designers or programmers could weigh in here and let us know what sort of algorithm the program uses to choose its objectives in a typical long campaign scenario.

[nimu]

Well guys,i read your last replies and i feel that all of us is right in a certain sense about complaining or not the AI.I think that if we only wait some days for the delivering of Mega campaign all our doubts about long campaigns will be shot down.If i well understood in M-C you'll have so much more briefing and high-level tactic decisions that we're gonna miss the boring old AI.M-C will be as challenging as a scenario but with the "pathos" and the atmospheres of a long campaign.And if it won't be enough......we'd better change game and try to call up Gasparov for a chess match!!!???

[murx]

Rob Fox,

However, a computer, as long as it is running a program, will never ever be able to make independent judgements even if you are using a 'neural net'.

You are so totally wrong ... neural net is YOUR brain, it enables You to judge independent - to try learned things under completely new circumstances - to learn at all, to even try complete new actions. To get a grasp on how 'independant' - 'innovative' (using completely new or concerning AI neural net - not programmed 'as is' actions) try playing Creatures or B&W. Creatures was programmed with direct support from the Oxford Institute on Brain Research... so it's not just some fancy fuzzy logic programming but 'the real thing' - like a brain.

I agree that human technology is not 'short' near producing real AI - but in less then 100 years I think we will actually face feeling and thinking AIs !! How we act then will be difficult...

murx

[Warrior]

Originally posted by Charles_22:
If so, there is an option to make that three clusters, with two in the back. I can't tell you what the option is that makes this possible, but it surely makes for more unpredictable advances from the AI (though always en masse).

"Victory Frontage" button "On." You get 5 objective flags instead of 3.

[ April 25, 2001: Message edited by: REMF ]

[Charles2222]

I must admit that the new version's rarity factor, when implemented, could make a profound difference in the conduct not only of the campaigner, but also of the forces the AI picks. Won't it just be so amusing to pick a platoon of say PZIVCs in core, and then find that another set may not be available? With deleted formations affecting the rarity pool, you better make sure that what you are deleting is something that's dime-a-dozen. I'm wondering if we'll be made privy to what the rarity factors are for each unit beforehand?

[rfox]

Originally posted by murx:

You are so totally wrong ... neural net is YOUR brain, it enables You to judge independent - to try learned things under completely new circumstances - to learn at all, to even try complete new actions. To get a grasp on how 'independant' - 'innovative' (using completely new or concerning AI neural net - not programmed 'as is' actions) try playing Creatures or B&W.
murx

Murx- I could agree with you if I could agree to reduce human thought down to simply being physical processes like neurons firing. I realize the human brain is composed of a 'neural net'. My point was that even if you could manufacture something as complex as a neural net for a computer, it would still have to 'think' according to its program. As far as I know, no one is hypothesizing that computers will some day be able to program themselves. That would be somewhat of a catch 22, chicken and the egg, etc.

Both B&W (which I've played) and Creatures can reduce the 'thought' and 'learning' taking place in the game down to programmed code. Deep down, they are still using 'if-then' processing. The thinking there is not 'ex nihilo' thinking. In the end, the silicon based monkey in B&W is doing what the programmers told it to do using a set of algorithms and following paths based on user input. It does a great job of masking an actual mind, but it isn't a 'ghost in the machine'.

To get even remotely back to subject: in the end, I think that the best way to improve the AI in a program such as SPWAW would be to create a database of potential 'decisions' that the AI player could make which would mask true intelligence similar to certain chess programs.

I'll stop now before I wax completely philosophical.

[murx]

OK, to make it short - the mere physical function of a simulated neural net is more or less the same way a biological neural net work - with more or less simplification. So deep down the simulated neuranal net is bits and bytes - but deep down the human brain is just burning carbonhydrate and sending proteins and other mere chemical processess.

Yet one neuron be it programmed or be it biological has abilities much different to the base it is made of be it bits and bytes or chemical messengers and electrical signals. So in effect the neuron of a human brain and a properly programmed one are the same (even though programmed neurons still suffer because they have only a finit value wheras the counterpart has more 'shades of grey' but is far from the simple ones and zeros - but that depends on the available memory and processing power).

So in mere functionality a large enough neural net can achieve the same 'power' of a brain. But there are still some unresolved question like how 'intuition' is achieved - is it just a not conscious stream of thoughts (very fast and using random factors) that only makes the result conscious or is it something more then mere 'physical' existenz and a 'soul' exists.

murx

[ April 26, 2001: Message edited by: murx ]

[rfox]

Murx: I'm hearing you and understanding you. I don't believe that human intelligence can be boiled down to physical neuronal activity, though. To put it bluntly, I think that there is a non-physical component to human thought and human decision making. Therefore, even if you could create a simulated neural net, it wouldn't function like a human mind since the human mind is not dependent on the brain. I hope that makes sense. Verstehen? Again, I would agree with you if I believed that human thought could be reduced to human brain functionality. Now we're venturing into religious and philosophical realms that I'm sure don't directly apply to SPWAW. If you would like to continue the discussion in another context, I would be happy to.

Bottom line: I don't believe that a computer/programmed AI will ever be completely unpredictable or function like a human opponent. Yes, I do believe that an AI could be programmed to be challenging, even in SPWAW with its plethora of variables. Perhaps some day we will see improvement in that arena.