Absolutely superb AI

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: wodin

Thanks PrestorJohn,

Your post is rather rude. I do know of one game without an AI Laser Squad Nemesis. I want a game with all the things you want but with an AI aswell. Whats wrong with that? Some people believe it or not do not have an internet connection as they cant afford one. Also whats selfish anout your idea is that people who dont have an internet connection or want to play against another person for the reasons I mentioned in my last post need an AI. With your idea of no AI then these people will miss out on the game. This isnt fair.

Funny enough I know boardgames dont have an AI. Shock Horror. However that is the beauty of PC's. You can play games without actually needing someone else there and you dont need all the other negatives you mentioned aswell. READ MY POST.

As for beating a lame AI. I have Suqad Battles. I dont play against the AI. I PBEM. However Im pleased it has one. So OTHER people (who havent the confidence to play someone else or who dont have an internet connection) can at least enjoy the game.

Also I dont feel that time or effort is wasted in making an AI at all. Sorry. If a game is being made by a good company/developer and the system works and it looks OK then whats the problem. PC's are powerfull enough these days to have it all. You dont have to make a chose betwen one or the other.

I do know that Lock and Load can be played using Vasl. However I dont want that. I want a fully working PC title with an AI and all the rules. With the hope of expansions later. Not a boardgame with some kind of added etc that really wouldnt be of the standerd as a full priced game. I'd also want to play it when I wanted not when someone else wants to.

Also as for the getting out of bed etc tec. Im disabled and have severe motability problems. So you certainly put your foot in it there didnt you.

Hey, you're the one who is selfish enough to want an AI for all wargames, so don't come the bent banana with me. Same goes for any other personal problems you may have. You have made it on to the internet, and are able to post messages, and I presume also able to interact with computer games. You've made it that far so you are fair game when it comes to criticism of your point of view. I'm not expecting to see you pull up a chair to a table but I am expecting you to realise that no matter how laid up you are, this idea (and VASSAL as well) may be the only way you might be able to fully participate in a real boardgame, so you can extract your own (figurative) foot at your own leisure.

Now if you don't like boardgames, then what do you care? You can still have all the inept AI you want in the currently available computer titles, with more coming your way every day. No doubt about that, it's guarenteed. But when there is an option for a developer to spend more on the two player experience, making the game look better, more detailed rules and units, anti-cheat facilities etc then why not do it. Realise that this is less of an issue with simpler games which is easier to program the AI to give a reasonable chance but the more complex the game the harder it is. But the bottom line still applies. Programming takes time and time is money. I think that for some games that time is wasted because the outcome is sub-standard and detracts from the value of the game. It's all about time, money and quality of the gaming experience.

Also you seem to be under some sort of delusion that you have to go out and buy games you don't want and therefore need to complain about them not having an AI and yet you have decided not to buy LnL. Just decide not to buy two player only games. Worse still you are complaining that LnL is not a computer game with an AI. Get a grip for a second. I'm asking that a computer game designer should consider enhancing the two player aspect of a good game design at the expense of the single player (Vs AI) mode. You on the other hand are asking that a game designer should change the medium of a game from board to computer and add an AI opponent. And you think that your opinion is right and mine is wrong?

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: wodin

ORIGINAL: Prester John

Actually no, I only want some good games. Games like ASL and World in Flames as I've already mentioned.

Funny enough so would I. With an AI aswell. It can be done you know;)

Just how many sheep stations do you want to bet that the AI for WiF is a complete lemon? At this time I'm willing to put BiN's AI on a top mark but it still falls for tricks and doesn't use tactics that it isn't programmed for. How good do you think a WiF or ASL AI will be, considering their much greater complexity

[Adam Parker]

ORIGINAL: Prester John

What can I say, other than that you don't seem to understand the concept of playing a two player board game on the computer. You're saying that it won't work solitare. Who cares? The idea is not to play solitare but against other players...

John you're all over the place in this thread. But I do understand the sole basis of your desire. You want all PC war games to only be playable by 2 humans. Well, you're 50 years behind the hobby old chap and well behind the needs of 21st century military educationalists.

But let's stick to the hobby for a second. Right, take ASL. Roughly 60 geomorphic maps combinable in more configurations than I can count, to be able to track LOS between them, allow for variable force placement pre scenario and program 100 pages of double columned rules into code, also allowing for scenario designation of counters representing endless arrays of infantry and armor combinations; Ausf D/E, 4-3-6 MMC's depicting Volksgrenadier, Ostruppen, Penal Squads etc., on a whim. Hey, to programmers it's just 0's and 1's afterall?

ORIGINAL: Prester John
Lastly, why do you need an AI as an umpire?

John, war gaming has developed beyond the god's eye view, the all-knowing omnipotent command of the paper battlefield, where you can not only hold your opponent's OOB card but see the continuous, real time disposition of his forces. To continue with the ASL example, the whole concept of Concealment markers was to establish a quasi-AI where total control and awareness of forces was taken away from both players.

The question you seem to be asking is why do you need an umpire to play a board war game? Because in the 21st century, war gaming without historically plausible fog is no longer the "gaming of war". Just pure 1950's fantasy. Those who truly live and breathe board gaming loudly accalim the command experience that only an umpired game can provide. It took Panzer Campaigns to shake me loose of my tunnel vision 5 years ago. Funnily enough, the military training establishment is now thinking my way too.

Hence, though I sympathize with you and in no way condone poor AI's touted as anything other, you're going to find that your commercial desires have already fallen by the wayside as the retail gaming market becomes more and more driven by tailor-made military applications that will eventually spin off in titles such as HPS's Modern Airpower and Battlefront's Combat Command. Design houses such as Panther and SSG hopefully can garner some business from these military end users too. There'd rarely be a designer active today without one eye geared to military interest. And today's million dollar product goes by the name "AI".

Adam.

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker

John you're all over the place in this thread. But I do understand the sole basis of your desire. You want all PC war games to only be playable by 2 humans. Well, you're 50 years behind the hobby old chap and well behind the needs of 21st century military educationalists.

Well I don't know where you get the screwy ideas about wanting all games made this way. I'd be quite happy with two, ASL and WiF, or their gaming equivalents. You can do want you want with anything else you care to come up with.

But let's stick to the hobby for a second. Right, take ASL. Roughly 60 geomorphic maps combinable in more configurations than I can count, to be able to track LOS between them, allow for variable force placement pre scenario and program 100 pages of double columned rules into code, also allowing for scenario designation of counters representing endless arrays of infantry and armor combinations; Ausf D/E, 4-3-6 MMC's depicting Volksgrenadier, Ostruppen, Penal Squads etc., on a whim. Hey, to programmers it's just 0's and 1's afterall?

And how much effort went into WitP?

Of course one wouldn't expect the whole ASL game to appear at once. Lets be a little realistic. The basics of Beyond Valour and Yanks would be a good idea. No need to go crazy and do it all at once and try and sell it for $2000. That would be silly.

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker

John, war gaming has developed beyond the god's eye view, the all-knowing omnipotent command of the paper battlefield, where you can not only hold your opponent's OOB card but see the continuous, real time disposition of his forces. To continue with the ASL example, the whole concept of Concealment markers was to establish a quasi-AI where total control and awareness of forces was taken away from both players.

The question you seem to be asking is why do you need an umpire to play a board war game? Because in the 21st century, war gaming without historically plausible fog is no longer the "gaming of war". Just pure 1950's fantasy. Those who truly live and breathe board gaming loudly accalim the command experience that only an umpired game can provide. It took Panzer Campaigns to shake me loose of my tunnel vision 5 years ago. Funnily enough, the military training establishment is now thinking my way too.

Hence, though I sympathize with you and in no way condone poor AI's touted as anything other, you're going to find that your commercial desires have already fallen by the wayside as the retail gaming market becomes more and more driven by tailor-made military applications that will eventually spin off in titles such as HPS's Modern Airpower and Battlefront's Combat Command. Design houses such as Panther and SSG hopefully can garner some business from these military end users too. There'd rarely be a designer active today without one eye geared to military interest. And today's million dollar product goes by the name "AI".

Adam.

Ummm, and why does the umpire have to be an AI? Why can't the game just show you the intel you have access to? Why does a game with a fog-of-war function need an AI? What I mean is that many computer games incorporate fog-of-war but have no role for an AI when played between two players.

Now if you had said that billions of dollars were being spent by militaries to develop AI's that would assist their own forces on military operations I would believe you (because they are). But to say that AI's are being developed by those militaries just to game against, I don't believe you.

[wodin]

ORIGINAL: Prester John

ORIGINAL: wodin

ORIGINAL: Prester John

Actually no, I only want some good games. Games like ASL and World in Flames as I've already mentioned.

Funny enough so would I. With an AI aswell. It can be done you know;)

Just how many sheep stations do you want to bet that the AI for WiF is a complete lemon? At this time I'm willing to put BiN's AI on a top mark but it still falls for tricks and doesn't use tactics that it isn't programmed for. How good do you think a WiF or ASL AI will be, considering their much greater complexity

But you dont have to play against the AI do you? However its there for others who do. A conversion of ASL (with expansions over time)can be done no problem with todays PC power. It can have an AI aswell, you just wouldnt play against it, others would. I really dont believe you would get a better product if no AI was implimented into a game. It would just be finished quicker. And they would lose sales.

[wodin]

HTTR as an example. Great game. Good AI. Couldnt have been a boardgame. Good example of using a computer to make a wargame which takes wargaming beyond the board and works. SO it can be done.

Your WiF and ASL when made into a PC game will be no better as a game with an AI or without, the only difference is that they would lose sales without. If the game is true to the boardgame then it wouldnt matter a jot if it had or didnt have an AI from your point of view. If the developer has the best intensions for the game then it will be true and have an AI. IF they havent it will be crap either way, with or without.

Take a look at CL.

What they want to achieve is possible. They are taking their time to get it right. The game would either come out earlier with no AI, or later with. It wouldnt be any better game without an AI.

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: wodin

But you dont have to play against the AI do you? However its there for others who do. A conversion for ASL can be done no problem with todays PC power. It can have an AI aswell, you just wouldnt play against it, others would. I really dont believe you would get a better product if no AI was implimented into a game. It would just be finished quicker. And they would lose sales.

AND it would not cost as much to produce! The cost savings could even be put into improving the two player game just to make it cheat proof (for example). Or just making the final product cheaper to buy.

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: wodin

HTTR as an example. Great game. Good AI. Couldnt have been a boardgame. Good example of using a computer to make a wargame which takes wargaming beyond the board and works. SO it can be done.

Your WiF and ASL when made into a PC game will be no better as a game with an AI or without, the only difference is that they would lose sales without. If the game is true to the boardgame then it wouldnt matter a jot if it had or didnt have an AI from your point of view. If the developer has the best intensions for the game then it will be true and have an AI. IF they havent it will be crap either way, with or without.

Take a look at CL.

What they want to achieve is possible. They are taking their time to get it right. The game would either come out earlier with no AI, or later with. It wouldnt be any better game without an AI.

Hello. If they don't spend time programming an AI it will be cheaper to produce. If only 5% of the customer base want an AI but they expand the customer base by 50% due to spending time on better game play or selling at a cheaper price then they win. Simple economics.

[Adam Parker]

ORIGINAL: Prester John

But to say that AI's are being developed by those militaries just to game against, I don't believe you.

"I currently have a contract with the Air Force to improve wargame AI..."

- Source: 'Warfare HQ Talks with John Tiller Once Again' www.warfarehq.com

No skin off my nose John [;)]

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker

ORIGINAL: Prester John

But to say that AI's are being developed by those militaries just to game against, I don't believe you.

"I currently have a contract with the Air Force to improve wargame AI..."

- Source: 'Warfare HQ Talks with John Tiller Once Again' www.warfarehq.com

No skin off my nose John [;)]

He's a lucky man if he's got a million dollar contract.

But what has that got to do with why AI's are required for a game with fog-of-war?

Warfare HQ: In our last interview, we talked to you about how difficult it is to create a really competent AI opponent. Have there been any notable advances in this area since then? Where do you see AI going in the future?

John: There has been only marginal improvement. I currently have a contract with the Air Force to improve wargame AI, but it is a two-year effort and will not reach completion even in that time frame. The task is just too hard to make much progress in the short term. I will do additional work, but the results will take some time to achieve.

.....

Warfare HQ: Can you give us a glimpse of what you might have in store for the future?

John: My work for the Air Force is producing some interesting results. There will be AI improvements coming, but gradually over time as the work produces results. The commercial game series will continue and new campaigns and battles will be addressed. I'm hopeful that the work I am doing for the government through small-business contracts will produce some interesting commercial spin-offs.

[LewFisher]

Hi guys,
New to this board, but not to wargaming. I have only just begun BIN but as in SSG's previous games, it seems well thought-out and with excellent A.I. I am not a programer but I understand the difficulty of programming wargames because of so many variables.
Someone mentioned board games. I had played traditional wargames for over 30 years. I designed a few and wrote a number of articles for various publications. However, as the years went by, I became more a more disgruntled with the errata for most games. I finally just gave up. Besides, it is difficult to get two or three guys together to play a game out. With a computer game, that is not a problem. Companies like Matrix and HPS also back their products on a long term basis

[PresbyterJohn]

Now there's something that I would like to see too. Updated electronic manuals/rulebooks. We have the BiN game rules in PDF but errata and updates are probably going to be far and few between.

Dare I say, dump the AI and update the game manuals instead.

[PJJ]

Well, if wargames didn't have AI, I wouldn't play them. I don't have anyone to play Hotseat games with me, and PBEM games are quite tedious to play.

So I can't understand this "Jihad" against the AI. We're in the 21st century, and computer technology is developing rapidly. Why should the wargames be as simple as some ancient boardgames from the 1960's?

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: PJJ

Well, if wargames didn't have AI, I wouldn't play them. I don't have anyone to play Hotseat games with me, and PBEM games are quite tedious to play.

So I can't understand this "Jihad" against the AI. We're in the 21st century, and computer technology is developing rapidly. Why should the wargames be as simple as some ancient boardgames from the 1960's?

There's a Jihad? Serious? Gosh, and I thought it was only me wishing out loud. Who else is of the same mind? We can get together and send a couple of emails to a developer, maybe. Anyway where is this Jihad at?

[wodin]

ORIGINAL: Prester John


Hello. If they don't spend time programming an AI it will be cheaper to produce. If only 5% of the customer base want an AI but they expand the customer base by 50% due to spending time on better game play or selling at a cheaper price then they win. Simple economics.

As you can see though its not 5%. You will find that your in the minority not the other way around. I really believe that having an AI doesnt make a lesser product in anyway. You havent played the right games. Why not put up a poll on this forum and see how many want games without an AI?

What do you say to all those who want to play WiF and an ASL conversion but need it with an AI? It just isnt fair.

[ravinhood]

I would buy a Squad Leader or ASL board wargame to computer conversion WITH and AI in a New York second, but, would not buy one without it. I already have all the boards and stuff, why spend another $2000 getting the computer version without an AI? Oh that's right for convience, I keep forgetting that convience thingy. hehe

[LewFisher]

The problem is economics. Even if A.I. is not included, computer wargames are for a very limited market. That's why BIN is $70.00 and WIE by Decision is about the same price. As others have said, ignore the A.I. and knock yourself out.[:D]

Lew Fisher

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

I would buy a Squad Leader or ASL board wargame to computer conversion WITH and AI in a New York second, but, would not buy one without it. I already have all the boards and stuff, why spend another $2000 getting the computer version without an AI? Oh that's right for convience, I keep forgetting that convience thingy. hehe

Would you buy the full game if the AI wasn't good enough to use fire lanes, or smoke and never went CE. There are AI opponents and there are AI opponents. If all they did was tack on the weakest of attempts of making an AI would that still count and therefore you would buy it? Or would you have some sort of standard? This is sort of a serious question because I'm wonderig if people have any sort of standards about how weak an AI can be and still call it an AI.

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: LewFisher

The problem is economics. Even if A.I. is not included, computer wargames are for a very limited market. That's why BIN is $70.00 and WIE by Decision is about the same price. As others have said, ignore the A.I. and knock yourself out.[:D]

Lew Fisher

I think there is a disconnection in logic here. The full game of BiN is $70 (whatever your local currency is) and the cost is related to the smallness of the buying market, but a proportion of that cost must be to cover the design and programming of the AI. Even if it was only 10% of the total workload (and I think I'm underestimating it a fair bit) then reducing the price by 10% is an option. Of course if you are going to lose more than 10% of your sales accordingly then it is a bad decision. However if the AI is 50% of the production cost but you are only going to lose 30% of sales then the figures become clearly in favour of dropping the AI.

Of course since I'm the only one who has so far voiced an opinion in favour of it I doubt that the numbers are anywhere in favour of it. Now supposedly there is a Jihad going on somewhere and if I can find it maybe we can threaten to send suicide e-mails unless somebody makes an AI-less game. But the point is that if the numbers were in favour simple economics wouild mean that we would have a few AI-less games available. Nobody is going to do 50% more work on a project for 20% more profit unless they are a charity.

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: wodin

ORIGINAL: Prester John


Hello. If they don't spend time programming an AI it will be cheaper to produce. If only 5% of the customer base want an AI but they expand the customer base by 50% due to spending time on better game play or selling at a cheaper price then they win. Simple economics.

As you can see though its not 5%. You will find that your in the minority not the other way around. You havent played the right games. Why not put up a poll on this forum and see how many want games without an AI?

What do you say to all those who want to play WiF and an ASL conversion but need it with an AI? It just isnt fair.

No, on the contrary what do you say to the people who have a choice of ASL without the AI, or no game at all because the cost of making an effective AI is prohibitively high? Now that quite simply isn't fair, holding everybody else hostage over a game just because you insist it must have AI to be sold.

And of course I haven't played the right games because I haven't found any games which are AI-less and cheaper than their AI'ed counterparts. And I have never said that I'm in any sort of majority, I've just said what I want.

Now about this statement of yours: "I really believe that having an AI doesnt make a lesser product in anyway." The question is not about the game being a lesser product as long as you are not paying for an AI that can put up a fight. If you are paying full price on the basis of the AI able to challenge the average player and win 50% of the time, but you are able to win 100% of the time against the AI then you have been ripped off. You have been given a lesser product than what you were paying for. So you need to rearrange your belief structures.