AI vs. Real Player

[macgregor]

I'm grateful everybody didn't jump all over me for expressing my feelings. I think what Steve has accomplished with pbem is probably quite playable and may give the netplay a run for it's money. BTW thank you Cheesehead, but for the reasons mentioned above I will wait for MWiF regardless. My WiF friends are also my concern as they are neither hardcore gamers nor even very much computer literate. They are however, big fans of WiF. It's my desire for a long-distance social experience with my old WiF friends that makes me so anxious over netplay. I can see where depending on people you've only met over the internet to congregate on a regular basis could be problematic. With me I'll be playing with old friends, and not to say problems won't arise with schedules-they always do eventually, but I have every confidence they will be motivated to play several times a week. I realize there's an imperative to have pbem and AI - I want very much for the game to include both. I just figure that netplay should be more of a priority as it's the only way to play WiF like the boardgame. Perhaps it is and I'm wrong. It just seems that of all the ways to play, it's now going to be added under great haste. I just hope it's as well thought out as the rest of the game has been.

[Cheesehead]

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead

I've played at least a dozen WiF games the past 4 years using Vassal, all via PBEM. Met a lot of WiF players all over the world in the process. My Vassal games all proceeded at a faster pace then the local, face-to-face games I've played. I'm sure MWiF will greatly improve the PBEM method, but it's not like any of us with a computer haven't been able to play WiF since Ken Griffiths completed the first WiF mod some 5 years ago? There has also been a dedicated group playing PBEM with Cyberboard. If it wasn't for the AI, what would be the point of spending all this time to make a game hundreds of us are already playing on our computers?

The difference is that all the board game play aids (Vassal, Cyberboard, Zun Tsu, Aide de Camp, etc.) rely on the players to perform all the actions they would in real FTF gaming. They are simply a virtual version of the real game. So if a player goofs a move by moving his units as if it were Fair weather, when in fact it is Rain, or counts the interception range of a plane wrong, or does his production or oiling wrong - then it is up to his opponent to spot all that and ask for redress. The closer these are to meeting over the table, the more likely things can get fixed before everyone gets frustrated. If you use Cyberboard or AdC and exchange moves by email, then goofs can frustrate the game experience to the point where people might rather not play. Plus with the Sequence of Play WiF has, you'd need gawd knows how many emails to complete even one impulse.

But having the game arbitrate all the actual rules and provide shortcuts to the PBEM experience (as currently being showcased in the PBEM thread) are what will give this game its attraction over the virtual play aid programs. Especially for a game as complicated as WiF is.

Yes, I recognize the big improvements MWiF will make to PBEM. I'll be first in line to purchase when it is released. The point I am making is that PBEM with Vassal (and I assume CB) is much easier than most people realize. The best games are with experienced players that don't make many mistakes. But I had the good fortune to have some patient mentors teach me the ropes with Vassal/PBEM and I have, in-turn done, the same with several guys that were willing to learn and had no other opponents nearby. My enjoyment with this method of playing WiF was such that it has been very easy for me to patiently wait for Steve to work his magic, without feeling the need to ask for short-cuts in the process (ie. no AI).

I brought up the question on Devin's WiF list a few weeks back whether or not people felt that they would eschew other forms of WiF after MWiF is released. Most people on that forum seem to think they will continue with the board game, and quite a few Vassal afficianados even believe they will continue with that method. Personall, I think I'm playing my last Vassal/PBEM game right now, but I'll still meet with the local guys once a month for our cardboard and paper game.

Cheers

John

[brian brian]

WiF is one of the 'prettiest' games around. Maybe it's just been so long since I've had very many other games set up, but the game just looks good with all the multi-colored counters spread out all over the globe. I will always probably play it on the paper maps with a friend and hopefully when I can at WiFCon or similar events. No variety of electronic play will replace the enjoyment of playing the game in person with other people with a similar interest in history. Every time I sit down at a table with WiF spread out on it, I learn something about WWII or current events or some other bit of history or who knows what, and the time involved flies by all too fast.

I don't think there are many people who are completely "anti" having an AI. Clearly people will want one, and anything that gets more people playing WiF is a good thing. For me though, I just want to kick in some money to help support the continuing development of the game. I use CyberBoard in my limited freetime to play some solitaire WiF. I would have been happy to pay for a computerized map and set of counters a long time ago, even without an AI; that could have come later. CyberBoard works pretty good for my purposes, though I still don't use it to play via PBEM despite having plenty of offers to do so from some of the top players of the game, as I don't have daily internet access and/or free time to play the game, with the career I have. So I well understand the people who look forward to an AI to play against to avoid time issues with other people. But CyberBoard still requires a lot of administrative book work on the player's part, and I greatly look forward to this being reduced as much as possible.

[I've been meaning to chime in on the solitaire thread that one shouldn't kid one's self that they will be able to play lots and lots of complete games of WiF when this program comes out. I find I have even less interest in playing out a game after 43-44 or so when playing solitaire than I do on a f-t-f paper game. There are just so many pieces to move that a whole turn begins to take days and days.]

But the original poster is exactly correct, that nothing can compare to pitting your plan against another unpredictable human being. "No plan survives contact with the enemy" is the famous quote about warfare. Steve takes those who doubt the potential of an AI to play this game as a challenge, and I think that is the best response. The AI is seeming to be developed with an eye to having a variety of response options to what the human does, and I think it will be less-than-predictable, for a time anyway (though recall my point about just how many whole games you will be able to ever play). I worry about how well the AI can plan muti-impulse, multi-turn, and even multi-year production/operations/campaigns that are necessary to win the war. This is not a game that can be played well by simply reacting to the enemy, move by move. Real generals lose battles and wars that way. WiF has a subtle way of rewarding the players who are operating with a sound plan. It does have it's quirks in that to win you have to play to the rules system, which rewards certain things more than you might feel is historical.

I think this forum is great and it has been very, very good for the game to have the electronic version done with so much input from actual players.

[IKerensky_alt]

And about keeping playing paper WiF and Vassal/PBEM WiF when MWiF will be out I think thoses games will still be played for a simple reason : MWiF wont be exactly like the others WiFs, strategies will be different especially if fighting in the Pacific. Have a look at the China map... and Persia, and Manchouria/USSR border. Plenty of changes here that will change a lot of things.Russo-Japanese and Sino-Japanese war wont be played the same way.
 
MWiF will be another beast just like Deluxe WiF is not Classic WiF, had a few maps and it change things.

[lavisj]

I must say that although I was skeptical when I first started PBEM, it has prooved very rewarding. It moved along much faster than I expected, although I still have to have a PBEM game into 43 (at which point I am sure it will slow down just due to the sheer amount of planes). But it has been moving at the same pace or even faster than my FtF group has.
I do prefer Netplay though as you gain the social aspect with it, and also it moves even faster. But a mixture of PBEM and netplay is probably the best. After all, those CW and US navals can take forever especially in the late game, and there is no real need for the oponent to be there, especially with a program like MWIF that will remove the trivial mistakes we all make. Netplay will become preferable for all the air and land combat sequence. So if the program allows to play the same game sometimes as PBEM and sometime as Netplay (which I think it does), then it will be wonderfull.

Jerome

[brian brian]

I think there will be some nostalgia for the original Asian map, but not much. The war there is dull and slow and hardly very realistic. Looking forward to trying it out in a whole new way. But I have a hard time seeing the space for a full sized Pacific, China, Siberia, and India. Maybe with a combination of the relevant map segments in East Asia combined with a sort of 'off-map' system using the old map. Yes, yes, I think a couple new ink cartridges and a package of cardstock are in order soon...

[bo]

See what you started Snydly, great thread, come on people keep it going even though I cant get involved [lack of net play experience] I learn from these discussions as long as everyones opinion is respected by all posters.

Willy

[micheljq]

ORIGINAL: lavisj

I do prefer Netplay though as you gain the social aspect with it, and also it moves even faster. But a mixture of PBEM and netplay is probably the best. After all, those CW and US navals can take forever especially in the late game, and there is no real need for the oponent to be there, especially with a program like MWIF that will remove the trivial mistakes we all make. Netplay will become preferable for all the air and land combat sequence. So if the program allows to play the same game sometimes as PBEM and sometime as Netplay (which I think it does), then it will be wonderfull.

Jerome

I think exactly the same thing. [:'(]

[Sewerlobster]

ORIGINAL: micheljq

ORIGINAL: lavisj
I do prefer Netplay though as you gain the social aspect with it, and also it moves even faster. But a mixture of PBEM and netplay is probably the best. After all, those CW and US navals can take forever especially in the late game, and there is no real need for the oponent to be there, especially with a program like MWIF that will remove the trivial mistakes we all make. Netplay will become preferable for all the air and land combat sequence. So if the program allows to play the same game sometimes as PBEM and sometime as Netplay (which I think it does), then it will be wonderfull.
Jerome

I think exactly the same thing. [:'(]

Sadly with my work schedule and other commitments NetPlay will be impossible and PBEM would be too sparodic from me to conscientiously commit to. If the AI proves lacking, it'll be all solitaire for me. So I'm all for a fully fleshed AI.

[obermeister]

PBEM seems a much more practical way to play.  Otherwise, when Commonwealth takes a naval, everyone can take a 30 minute break. 

What would be cool, and I don't know if this will be allowed, if it's possible to switch between PBEM and netplay mode sometimes.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: obermeister

PBEM seems a much more practical way to play.  Otherwise, when Commonwealth takes a naval, everyone can take a 30 minute break. 

What would be cool, and I don't know if this will be allowed, if it's possible to switch between PBEM and netplay mode sometimes.

A couple of comments here:

1 - MWIF should make naval moves much easier (less time consuming), assuming the player knows what he wants to do. The units are easier to access (compared to large stacks in over-the-board games) and it is easier to see all the other units at sea (even when those are large stacks). The naval review details and summary forms were designed specifically for that purpose. Not to say that all the complexities of performing the Commonwealth naval moves go away, but they should be mitigated significantly.

2 - The non-phasing player could very well need to make a decision about naval interception. So, the Axis player needs to be available during those "30 minutes", just in case.

3 - I expect PBEM games to be able to transition to NetPlay and back again later. But games that start as NetPlay will not have that option. One consideration is that PBEM is only for two players while NetaPlay can have up to 6 players (3 per side).

[Gurggulk]

I think it's a huge step forward in programing an AI for MWiF. A step that brings WiF into the 21st century of computer gaming. A beginning step.

Its quite a challenge that Shannon V. OKeets, is undertaking to create an AI for this work of art. I fully support his mission in tackling this endeavor. [&o]

Anyone expecting perfection from the AI, at release is not a realist. Look at the errata and changes to WiF over the years. Not to mention the "house rules" sprung up around the game for a myriad of reasons. Look at the Forum posts. So much input and love for a game.

Love for a game? Think that is crazy? I don't, cuz its not just the game, its the people you have played with, will play with. Including the AI. I'm happy to see the birth of an AI that will grow and adapt as long as we are here to feed it, nurture it and punish it, as you punish you're friends across the table. The learning curve we have come to know was through playing. Playing to win.

It is through the AI we will see growth. Growth will bring new players and greater exposure. The new player looking for depth, in a WWII wargame. Not just a "rush" to win game. Patience is rewarded as is audacity. Long range planning and muti-faceted operations spanning a World in Flames, is not just a metaphor. Economic planning along strategic goals, will not be found in just any game on the market.

Anyone who has played the game knows the rollercoaster ride of emotions that fill a room of friends. Moments when time stops and all release at once in joy and despair. Those highlights are enduring and replayable because of the uncertainty. What could'a happened but the turn ended. What would'a happened but the weather changed. What should'a happened but the dice turned cold as death.

Will the AI make me feel the way and room of gamers makes me feel?

Probably not in the same way that you feel shaking dice in sweaty/shaky hands. Getting up to stretch after the 1st impluse of Barbarrosa. Counting up US entry again and again realizing you can Gear up for war. Wacthing as the convoy line to the UK is shattered under U-boat attacks. Knowing you just lost the pacific as Japan, and its time to defend the home islands.
But most important for me, The AI can't surrender from a hopeless position. It won't negotiate a re-play of a past turn. It won't get in my face after a weekend of playing, smelling of cigars, beer, unwashed socks and pizza breath to congratulate me for a game well played. Knowing we will get back together in a week to start all over again.
In the end, it just gets turned off.

Yes i want and look forward to an AI. But... its more important to realize the AI is a tool to play an elegant system. A system recreating the historical event of WWII. Air, Sea, Land, Economics, Politcal, Logistics. A means of growth from this forum to the outside world. Yes, that scary world out there that plays games but have not really played this game.

When the flame begins and the heat is rising, i really want a human being to share my gaming time with.
The AI can be a wonderful opponent, somedays. Un caring, untiring, speechless.
But give me that cussing SOB that makes me work my ass off and meet the challenge.

[bo]

ORIGINAL: Gurggulk

I think it's a huge step forward in programing an AI for MWiF. A step that brings WiF into the 21st century of computer gaming. A beginning step.

Its quite a challenge that Shannon V. OKeets, is undertaking to create an AI for this work of art. I fully support his mission in tackling this endeavor. [&o]

Anyone expecting perfection from the AI, at release is not a realist. Look at the errata and changes to WiF over the years. Not to mention the "house rules" sprung up around the game for a myriad of reasons. Look at the Forum posts. So much input and love for a game.

Love for a game? Think that is crazy? I don't, cuz its not just the game, its the people you have played with, will play with. Including the AI. I'm happy to see the birth of an AI that will grow and adapt as long as we are here to feed it, nurture it and punish it, as you punish you're friends across the table. The learning curve we have come to know was through playing. Playing to win.

It is through the AI we will see growth. Growth will bring new players and greater exposure. The new player looking for depth, in a WWII wargame. Not just a "rush" to win game. Patience is rewarded as is audacity. Long range planning and muti-faceted operations spanning a World in Flames, is not just a metaphor. Economic planning along strategic goals, will not be found in just any game on the market.

Anyone who has played the game knows the rollercoaster ride of emotions that fill a room of friends. Moments when time stops and all release at once in joy and despair. Those highlights are enduring and replayable because of the uncertainty. What could'a happened but the turn ended. What would'a happened but the weather changed. What should'a happened but the dice turned cold as death.

Will the AI make me feel the way and room of gamers makes me feel?

Probably not in the same way that you feel shaking dice in sweaty/shaky hands. Getting up to stretch after the 1st impluse of Barbarrosa. Counting up US entry again and again realizing you can Gear up for war. Wacthing as the convoy line to the UK is shattered under U-boat attacks. Knowing you just lost the pacific as Japan, and its time to defend the home islands.
But most important for me, The AI can't surrender from a hopeless position. It won't negotiate a re-play of a past turn. It won't get in my face after a weekend of playing, smelling of cigars, beer, unwashed socks and pizza breath to congratulate me for a game well played. Knowing we will get back together in a week to start all over again.
In the end, it just gets turned off.

Yes i want and look forward to an AI. But... its more important to realize the AI is a tool to play an elegant system. A system recreating the historical event of WWII. Air, Sea, Land, Economics, Politcal, Logistics. A means of growth from this forum to the outside world. Yes, that scary world out there that plays games but have not really played this game.

When the flame begins and the heat is rising, i really want a human being to share my gaming time with.
The AI can be a wonderful opponent, somedays. Un caring, untiring, speechless.
But give me that cussing SOB that makes me work my ass off and meet the challenge.

Well said Gurggulk, smelly socks whew, SOBS! god forbid beer. [:D] I think though you missed the most important thing when it comes to the AI, you can turn that SOB off if you made a blunder and are going to lose the game, Tommorow is another day!

Willy

[Gurggulk]

Bo,
Its those Blunders when they are made, build a foundation from which you start to really play the game. 2 types of blunders...
 
1. The blunder made by you.
It's important to get over it quickly. Use it as a sacrifice. Plan a path to recover from it. Give your opponent a beer,&nbsp;let him know he is awesome and you suck. <This opens the door to the next Blunder.>
&nbsp;
2. The Blunder made by your opponent.
Capitalize quickly on this blunder. Don't let it overtake your long range plans, most Blunders are short term. Give your opponent a beer and let him know blunders happen. <This leads to more Blunders from which more beer is shared.>
&nbsp;
WiF in many ways is death&nbsp;by a thousand cuts. Not that there are not some choices that will leave you wondering how you got in this damned position. Mostly no&nbsp;single mistake will sink you.
There is much&nbsp;to expirence, even in defeat. Playing to the bitter end is not for everyone. But that bitter taste left in your mouth is sweet knowing you played&nbsp;longer than thought possible.

[Jeffrey H.]

No AI, no sale for me.

[coregames]

Steve

In the interest of maximizing its overall strength of its play, I am curious; while the AIO is being tested, are you going to assign strategic approaches to the various betatesters, to supply a wider range of tests to the effectiveness of the AI? It seems that adopting planned divergence in testing such as this would be helpful, though you probably have already considered this.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: coregames

Steve

In the interest of maximizing its overall strength of its play, I am curious; while the AIO is being tested, are you going to assign strategic approaches to the various betatesters, to supply a wider range of tests to the effectiveness of the AI? It seems that adopting planned divergence in testing such as this would be helpful, though you probably have already considered this.

A good suggestion - thanks.

[IKerensky_alt]

About the netplay, could it be possible for player of the same side to take over command of an absent player ?
&nbsp;
Lets say we start the game with 6 players. Sessions end, game saved. Next Session, Italy/Japan player dont show up... can we start the game with the German player commanding all the Axis forces and decision ?

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Greywolf

About the netplay, could it be possible for player of the same side to take over command of an absent player ?

Lets say we start the game with 6 players. Sessions end, game saved. Next Session, Italy/Japan player dont show up... can we start the game with the German player commanding all the Axis forces and decision ?

Yes. I have thought about this a lot and built the design so the "team leader" can replace players. There are a lot of variations and I think I have them all covered.

[HansHafen]

I think Steve needs to focus almost exclusively on the AI from now on. If this product won't work at all without a workable AI, as many have said in the "When" post responses to my suggestion, then that is the priority. I may be wrong in my understanding, but I think Steve has said that the AI has yet to make any decision in game. (Correct me if I am wrong). If this is so, massive work is still needed in this area. Four months doesn't seem to be long enough to get that done. And he is still needing to spend time on other things listed in his task list. It seems to me that the AI is going to be the most challenging aspect of this entire project, correct? Won't this take the longest to complete and test?
&nbsp;
&nbsp;