AI cheating and supporting AI troops ! CONFIRMED

[MC456]

It took humanity so long to build a Chess AI to beat the world's best player, and that was at a game that is about a billion times simpler than Shadow Empire where each piece has one move style on average. Keep in mind it's no easy task to create an AI that plays by the rules and is equally challenging to top tier players in games like this. There's a reason why developers give their AIs some "cheats" in order to pose a challenge.

With all that said, I look forward to the day when advanced neural-net driven AI is common among every video game. I think it will revolutionize the gaming scene. It will be even more revolutionary once we get intelligent AI that we can actually talk to when it comes to making diplomatic deals in 4X games.
Though constantly subjugating AIs in video games might give them the wrong idea about humanity.

[shi4stone]

I dont understand the complaints about AI cheating. Whatelse do you expect? an AI that can handle a game this complex as good as human? are you living in the sci/fi universe and expect a shadow? As long as the AI can hide its cheat through smart mechanism and create a balanced and enjoyable experience then it is as good as one can get from any 4x game. And i think this game is doing very well on that front. The only exception is AI road construction not because it is free but rather it creates spaghetti network and become too visible to human player

[Ayus]

Sorry but i dont know what you are doing with your supply. In my current game my eastern Army is 30(!) Hexes away from my Truck Station (IV) and in green (2 yellow) supply.
Also i only have 6 traffic signs right now (will be more once i conquer the AI though), 3 of which i have in my capital to select the priority of my supply flow.
All of my troops on the map, 5 Brigades and many Militia+Independent except 2 militia units are in good supply.
So i guess you should not flame the system as an excuse that you obviously play suboptimal.
Yes, the AI might have a small advantage, but its not really disturbing in my point of view. Even in my first game, where i still had BIG supply problems because i did not know how the system worked, i wasnt mad about the AI. Well, my games till now are only on beginner/regular difficulty. Maybe it gets worse on Hard+. Will definetly see after i win my regular game.

TLDR: Plan more supply efficient and with traffic signs. That will fix your supply problems and wont make you blame the AI for having massive advantages. Because it hasnt. Its like saying an easy bot in Counter Strike is cheating with WallHack+Aim Bot...just because your reaction time and aim is too bad.

Wish i could add a Screenshot, but i can not. If you want one i can send it to you. Maybe Links are allowed in PMs?

[willgamer]

ORIGINAL: ernieschwitz

I am always wary of someone who uses CAPS LOCK to make a point, and call people names... Maybe that is just me. I don't see how it furthers discussion.

As for the AI Cheating, name me one game, of complixity high enough, that is where players get many options of different natures, that the AI uses exactly the same rules as the player. I am betting there are none, and that you are only being tricked to think, that it isn't so.

ME TOO! [:D]

"Cheating" is a loaded word to intentionally cast dispersion on the game. Strategic AI's get advantages... every time... full stop. [>:]

How many times has perception been the biggest problem? [&:]

If the AI built no roads at all, I wonder if the subject would get so much attention? [&:]

p.s. name calling does not help your arguments [:-]

[nadia911]

Perfect!

[&o]

[JWW]

ORIGINAL: Cornuthaum

ORIGINAL: Frostwave

If the AI struggles too much without this advantage I say leave it in. If Vic can make the AI competent as far having it follow the same rules for logistics that we have to use then I'm for it.

I just imagine they have able leaders keeping the supplies flowing so doesn't bother me at all. What would bother me is if they cant hold their own anymore. I can manage my logistics just fine and so can most people after doing some research on the subject(not a slight on anyone just saying it seems like AI currently are not capable so would be too huge of an advantage to remove it at the moment); I don't want changes that will impair the AI's ability to wage war. We have too many advantages over AI enemies as it is.

Well said. It's more important to have an AI that can hold its own in a fight than it is to try - and inevitably fail - to make a human-level AI (because any videogame dev that could do that should just sell it to their military or corporate entity of choice :X)

+1

[JWW]

FlashXAron_slith, no need to call people "morons" and "idiots."

[Grotius]

I agree. There's no need for name-calling.

The manual is quite clear that the AI gets various advantages. In fact, it's far more open about this than most strategy games. I knew this when I bought the game, and I don't mind it at all. It's giving me a good game, and that's the important thing to me.

[Dampfnudel]

ORIGINAL: FlashXAron_slith

CONCLUSION OF THAT DISCUSSION : QUESTION for the Devs @Vic

WILL WE EVER GET AN AI, which is able to play with the same rules as the human player ????

----> ANSWER
I am planning to tune down this free dirt roads rule in the weeks to come. I might even go so far as to put it on an equal footing with human players. There has been much rucos about this advantage and I am willing to listen to the player base here.

Best wishes,
Vic


__________________________________________________________________________________________________



Okay after over 120 turns in my "slow" game ...

my troops ... even tried it with the cheapest "foot troops" hate it, when they are more than 7 hexes away from any Truck Station ... so alway have to build one , depending on terrain, every 6th hex or so ... no problem ...
...
BUT that damn AI is driving around with his troops ONLY with dirt roads !
One of the major one, even conquered that way, without any depots, already 40% of the "largest" map ...

so is that damn AI cheating at NORMAL settings ...

as you could see , my red territory needs that red points (truck stations) , when you look at my friend LOL around me (also south and SE ... nothing only dirt roads , so he was a lot faster to grab everything ...
think soon he will crush me , as it seems he also has 10 times the troops ... so there is the next question MONEY to pay his troops ! LOL

You need to place traffic signs at every single intersection. Otherwise, all your supply gets wasted.
This design is liked by many players for odd reason.

[KingHalford]

Chess and other very simple board games aside, I'll challenge anybody here to name one computer strategy game where the AI is both competent AND plays by exactly the same rules the player does.

[KingHalford]

That aside, it's well documented just how difficult it is to get an AI to be able to "think ahead" as humans can. Even relatively simple strategy games have a level of complexity that make it infeasible for the AI to compete with a human brain without some simplification of rules, or some kind of resource advantage.

Shadow Empire is on another level of complexity entirely and expecting the developer to get the game to play to the same rules as the human player is completely unreasonable and I expect the results would be disasterous.

You're just going to have to accept that unless you play multiplayer, the AI will have to have some advantage to allow it to compete.

[Laiders]

ORIGINAL: KingHalford

That aside, it's well documented just how difficult it is to get an AI to be able to "think ahead" as humans can. Even relatively simple strategy games have a level of complexity that make it infeasible for the AI to compete with a human brain without some simplification of rules, or some kind of resource advantage.

Shadow Empire is on another level of complexity entirely and expecting the developer to get the game to play to the same rules as the human player is completely unreasonable and I expect the results would be disasterous.

You're just going to have to accept that unless you play multiplayer, the AI will have to have some advantage to allow it to compete.

The interesting thing here right is Vic doesn't just give advantages. He simplifies AI rules as uniformly and minimally as possible, depending on intended significance of AI, to get the AI leveled up for the intended difficulty. An example of this is AI logistics simplifications. Mostly advantages. Except the AI cannot never use strategic transfer. This makes the AI's life much simpler and probably speeds up turns a lot and stops the AI wasting logistics etc. It's good. It's also a gigantic disadvantage against a good human player. Strategic transfer is a pretty big force multiplier.

This is why I like Vic's games and trust him to design a fair AI that uses all the systems as fully as it reasonably can within the constraints imposed upon it and do not want he to waste time heroically trying to achieve the impossible.

Iff the AI rules can be complicated further towards human player level without making it worse, without simplification (or at least closes consultation on any simplification) and without worse average performance on regular difficulty, then I think it is worth development time.

If that scenario is, on balance, deemed unlikely by Vic, I'd rather he spent time polishing other things or developing some other interesting threads further story-wise or developing additions such as air/navy or a degree of terraforming etc.

[Mook881]

Sticking to the issue at hand, I must agree with the original poster, that I don't want a game to cheat. It should play as close (as possible) to the rules that humans use. One thing that I don't understand from this discussion is the blindness of responses from both sides. For me, there is a very simple solution....give the player the choice! At game setup and in the settings screen during a game, there should be a check box that you can toggle and the player can pick the ruleset the computer players follow. Now everyone can be happy!

I have never played any game like this before, and it would be nice to have an even playing field while I am learning and I am a new dad, so I don't have as much time to read a 300+ page manual (although I am trying slowly!). I also am not used to complex logistical systems, so I don't want to face an impossible foe and have to min/max things to win on easy. That's not fun for me. This is a game, so I should be winning most of the time as an escape from reality.

I would definitely like to see more customizable options in the beginning at game setup. More options is always better for the player and reduces these heated arguments. Play the game how you want!

[Laiders]

ORIGINAL: Mook881

Sticking to the issue at hand, I must agree with the original poster, that I don't want a game to cheat. It should play as close (as possible) to the rules that humans use. One thing that I don't understand from this discussion is the blindness of responses from both sides. For me, there is a very simple solution....give the player the choice! At game setup and in the settings screen during a game, there should be a check box that you can toggle and the player can pick the ruleset the computer players follow. Now everyone can be happy!

I have never played any game like this before, and it would be nice to have an even playing field while I am learning and I am a new dad, so I don't have as much time to read a 300+ page manual (although I am trying slowly!). I also am not used to complex logistical systems, so I don't want to face an impossible foe and have to min/max things to win on easy. That's not fun for me. This is a game, so I should be winning most of the time as an escape from reality.

I would definitely like to see more customizable options in the beginning at game setup. More options is always better for the player and reduces these heated arguments. Play the game how you want!

But that doesn't work right. It would be a gigantic source of bugs if the two rulesets could bleed into one another. AI development work would be doubled in size and at least 4 times as hard. Players would be unable to support other players due to divergent rulesets. Etc.

You do not have to read the manual. Just keep it open as a reference document and alt-tab to it as absolutely necessary in game. It's pretty easy to search once you learn game key terms and key terms can be readily found on the UI, though the UI is generally a little messy. I would read or at least skim the 'How to Play' section but even this can be done in stages.

If you've got half an hour or an hour spare to watch/listen to something, watch some of Das's tutorials [link:Das tutorial playlist ep 00: Intro to Series]. They may not always be perfect but they are very, very good and more than enough to get you started.

Pro-tip: Das has a slow and clear manner of speaking so, if you can cope with an Australian English accent, turn the play-back speed up to 1.5 or 2 to get more learning in the same time! [:)]

Also always ask here if you want and we will gladly help.

[Mook881]

hey Laiders,

thanks for the nice reply! I have noticed that this community is quite knowledgeable and kind, and is extremely helpful for new players. I also love Das, and I have watched a few of his videos for Shadow empire and that has helped as well.

For me, its more about playing the game so that it feels even. I haven't got very far into the game (10 turns maybe?), and I have already seen many people that I presume are at my level with this type of strategy game (medium experience, but not with logistics) staying they are getting steamrolled at turn 70 by easy AI. I definitely don't what that to be a regular occurrence, since I have limited time to play.

I think that options are good for the player, and I don't see how setting up which rules you want the AI to use (human vs. simplified) will affect one another. Again, I am flexible with this, as I completely understand the AI may never play effectively using all rules humans use. I would just ask for an option to more closely mimic the rules that humans use. I think Vic mentioned he is looking into this. If he gets this working, I think he should make this an option for players at game start. I know many veteran players love the difficulty, so I wouldn't want that changed for them. That's why I think options are the best!

I appreciate your viewpoint though and I will definitely be back with questions for you soon enough

[Laiders]

ORIGINAL: Mook881

hey Laiders,

thanks for the nice reply! I have noticed that this community is quite knowledgeable and kind, and is extremely helpful for new players. I also love Das, and I have watched a few of his videos for Shadow empire and that has helped as well.

For me, its more about playing the game so that it feels even. I haven't got very far into the game (10 turns maybe?), and I have already seen many people that I presume are at my level with this type of strategy game (medium experience, but not with logistics) staying they are getting steamrolled at turn 70 by easy AI. I definitely don't what that to be a regular occurrence, since I have limited time to play.

I think that options are good for the player, and I don't see how setting up which rules you want the AI to use (human vs. simplified) will affect one another. Again, I am flexible with this, as I completely understand the AI may never play effectively using all rules humans use. I would just ask for an option to more closely mimic the rules that humans use. I think Vic mentioned he is looking into this. If he gets this working, I think he should make this an option for players at game start. I know many veteran players love the difficulty, so I wouldn't want that changed for them. That's why I think options are the best!

I appreciate your viewpoint though and I will definitely be back with questions for you soon enough

Yeah but people get steamrolled generally because they do not understand what the game is telling them or because they do not apply good basic military theory. Also I mean starts are highly random and situational. I am a reasonable player but I may lose my third big game (first won but abandoned before I made it formal; second abandoned due to boredom and to move to 1.02 with unclear victory state) because I am getting entangled on wars on too many fronts.

Play with every overlay and report to get the game to tell you what you need for your level. Always apply good military theory. Read the combat odds screen closely to figure out some of the more 'gamey' stuff.

This does not mean I played badly, though I certainly have not played perfectly. Recently I was reminded of this Star Trek scene by a post on Daystrom Institute sub-reddit. Captain Picard, the captain of this version of the Enterprise, is consoling his android second officer [promoted to first for this ep but that's irrelevant] Data about losing a game of strategy. Data is a strong AI. He is mentally and physically vastly more capable than a human, though he struggles greatly with emotion and lacks experience. Data does not lose games of skill unless the skill tested is interpersonal. Yet he lost to a master organic player of a particular game early in this episode. Picard gives his classic tough love and wisdom. I won't spoil the line. Data gets over his existential crisis and serves with distinction for the rest of this episode and the entire darn franchise. He even comes up with a new strategy that counters his nemesis.

It's a beautiful scene and only a min or so. If you do watch it, remember Picard's words and play this game with that spirit.

Remember losing can be fun! [;)]

Back on topic, AIs playing transparently is key and on a level playing field is key. AIs playing by the same rules can handicap AI or force use of artificial bonuses that are then concealed. No-one wants to say they have to give their AI tonnes of free resources every turn to help it keep up.

Final link is to this collection of reddit tips that are also quite good for the early game: Some tips and tricks

PS: reminds me the War Room could do with a curated tips and ticks thread for beginner and regular difficulty only.

[Naselus]

ORIGINAL: Mook881

For me, its more about playing the game so that it feels even. I haven't got very far into the game (10 turns maybe?), and I have already seen many people that I presume are at my level with this type of strategy game (medium experience, but not with logistics) staying they are getting steamrolled at turn 70 by easy AI. I definitely don't what that to be a regular occurrence, since I have limited time to play.

In basically no case reported so far have those steamrolls happened due to the AI's minor advantages, tbh. It's more or less always down to the individual player's mistakes - and not minor mistakes in most cases, more 'I was completely ignoring how this entire aspect of the game works and it turns out that doing that for 70 turns was bad' mistakes.

Players who don't understand the way models work field ineffectual units which then get crushed on the front lines. Players who don't know how to run the economy create barely-productive zones with hundreds of buildings that hurt them more than they help. Players who don't have a good grasp of how tech works end up gimping themselves with no access to power plants or other key techs; players who ignore their character relations suddenly lose half their empire to rebellions and don't notice that a governor who hates you cuts zone production by 25% and then steals half the tax income on top...

This is usually where those turn 70 fails are creeping in. The AI major powers can't really steamroll you after 70 turns based on the savings they accumulate from not needing to build a few truck station 2s and getting a couple of dozen tiles worth of dirt road for free. They steamroll you on turn 70 because you have set up your empire to fail somehow, and by that point in the game the small flaws have become massive fissures in your industrial base, military strength and research.

[Mook881]

Hi naselus,

Thanks for the reply.

That is nice to know about AI advantages on Easy, but I guess my point is that options for the player are good! I know you only commented on one little part of both of my posts, which is my problem with the responses so far. The fact that you say "well the player just doesn't get anything" brings me a little concern, because I would expect that, when playing on easy, you could mess up half of the things you mentioned in your post and still should be competitive. I guess since there is no game quite like this (at least in my experience) in terms of how you acquire tech, all the cool councils that you can manage and appoint leaders to, the logistics system, and the really awesome and complex combat. I used to have more time to sit and lose many games before to learn, but now I basically can play 1 day a week at best. So, I prefer things to be fun and give me a chance to mess up a lot, but still be able to recover (on easy difficulty only). Also, I don't see why this can't be optional to have the ruleset be chosen by the player. Just don't use that if you like the game the way it is, right? Vic is looking into this based on some posts I saw and his poll question. I think options are good and again, as I said before, I don't expect Vic to make an AI use every rule a human uses, just a better mimic.

Does that make sense about options and learning curve on easy?

what are other players thoughts on this and why the resistance to more starting options for games (as long as it doesn't take too much time away from improving the game in other ways)?

[Jdane]

ORIGINAL: Naselus

players who ignore their character relations suddenly lose half their empire to rebellions and don't notice that a governor who hates you cuts zone production by 25% and then steals half the tax income on top...

Sounds like an opinion at least partly informed by personal experience. [:'(]

At any rate, I would say there's absolutely no shame in playing at beginner level for starters if one is unfamiliar with war games or previous VR Designs' franchises.
This lifts a significant amount of pressure from one's shoulder and allow them to concentrate on exploring and learning the mechanics of the game.

Along the same line, I think it's perfectly acceptable to reload a previous save and start again, from the very beginning if need be. Making dedicated saves with significant names at turning points in the game can only help. Knowing the lay of the land, and what pitfalls to avoid can only improve the learning experience in my opinion.

These statements sound almost too obvious to make, and if they are, I apologize for wasting a bit of your time. But one is perfectly free to use the tools readily available to tailor their gaming experience to their needs and tastes. It is a rather sophisticated game, but one can very well take it easy.

Do not fret about getting overrun. As others said, it is often because one rushed onward and doing so missed important clues. I've been playing slow since I'm writing an report for other people to enjoy, and it improved significantly my understanding of and appreciation for Shadow Empire, at least I like to think so.

If you're a newbie dad (congratulations by the way) you'll have to exercise patience sooner or later. You could train this skill on Shadow Empire, and it wouldn't detract from your experience, on the contrary. Just expect planetary conquest to take a few weeks or months, is all.

The AI does quite a good job at challenging the player, but it makes the occasional mistake too, and the player is much more apt of taking advantage of it. You just have to build a solid foundation, and then you'll be able to fly by the seat of your pants following along your intuition.

It might just take a little time to grok.

ORIGINAL: Mook881
...

I hadn't realized yet you have only game session per week left. That is very little, and I'm getting unsure you'll have enough time handy to enjoy SE.

I think naselus was pointing out there's a snowball effect. While you take 70 turns to figure stuff out - honestly I think if it takes this long you should slow down, think harder and Alt+Tab to the manual more, and I really don't intend being rude when saying that - the AI goes on with its game plan and when it comes to Ragnarok, you're way behind the curve.

This is why I suggest to make good use of the ability to revert and reload. Now you know the land, you know the enemy, when it'll hit and with what, and you can plan again accordingly.

In the end it really depends on what your definition of fun is, I would say. If you need to win to have fun, and have no experience with this kind of games, you might spend some time not having fun. If learning and improving brings you fun, Shadow Empire can most certainly bring it.

As to having even more options to customize the user's experience, sure, how can one could say no to this? But I just don't know if VR Designs can spare the resources to do so. In the meantime, reloading a previous state and trying again would be your best option.

[Jdane]

- Matrix forums' software... [:@]-