Absolutely superb AI

[LewFisher]

Sure, it would cost less to produce a game without A.I. but as you yourself have stated, few would buy it.

It has probably been mentioned but HPS has Aide DE Camp. It takes hundreds of board games and converts them to a non A.I. computer games with good graphics.[;)]

[PresbyterJohn]

Yep, and there are a stack of VASSAL playable games out there too. More than I realised until a few days ago. But they are still not as easy to play as a game with the rules built in from the start. It's that issue with the detail of the rules, and also with making multiplayer computer games cheat proof (by providing more resources to the programmers) that are on my wish list.

[wodin]

ORIGINAL: Prester John


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.

Ive never heard of any game not being made beause programming an AI is to expensive. Who is it that wants to make a conversion of ASL but cant as they cant afford to do the AI? Everygame now caters for either AI and some kind of human vs human. Again why not make a poll on this site as to whether you would by a game with no AI. This will give you an answer on how many customers would be lost.

Look, ASL and WIF I'd play against a human more often than not. However I'd also want to play against an AI when I felt like it. Its good way to learn the mechanics of a new game anyway.

If the AI is rubbish then the game will go down the pan. So what. To me this means the developer has rushed out the product or isnt that good in the first place so the game without an AI would be pretty bad aswell.

So can you tell me the games that arent being developed by someone as they cant afford an AI? As Ive never heard of any.

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: wodin

If the AI is rubbish then the game will go down the pan. So what. To me this means the developer has rushed out the product or isnt that good in the first place so the game without an AI would be pretty bad aswell.

So can you tell me the games that arent being developed by someone as they cant afford an AI? As Ive never heard of any.

What is this before me, a flash of realisation that bad AI's are bad games? What games aren't being developed right now? I have no idea. ASL and WiF? Lock 'n Load? PanzerBlitz? Is this related to the Jihad?

[Adam Parker]

ORIGINAL: Prester John to Wodin

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...

Well, John I must say that a person who leads a debate claiming a knowledge of what the hobby is clamouring for without having researched his assertions really does provide some entertainment - for a short while. John, as you've repeated a few times now I really do believe that you just "don't understand". It is all about the industry's value of it's games:

_____

"WiF: The Computer game... World in Flames(tm) Final(ly) on the computer. The entire world is represented on the European scale on a wrap-around map of the world. At 360 x 195 hexes, this is the largest computer wargame ever produced.

You will no doubt be pleased to hear that we are now in the position of having finalised 95% of the code if you exclude the Artificial Intelligence component. As to the production of the AI, we have had many conflicting views from our customers, some saying we can't produce a version without the AI, others that the AI doesn't matter.

To resolve this issue, ADG has decided to produce a pre-release version of the game which will exclude the AI. This version will be sold at a 33% reduction in price of the final release game (50% discount for LoC subscribers). Furthermore, those who buy the pre-release version will get the final version for 50% off as well. We hope that this approach will satisfy all (or nearly all) our valued customers..."

_____

John - that's ADG before coming on board with Matrix. Seems 66% of retail value in the industry's eyes rests with the AI.

ORIGINAL: Prester John

Of course if you are going to lose more than 10% of your sales accordingly then it is a bad decision.

You're really loosing this debate of yours badly [:)]

Adam.

PS: Got my maths wrong too - 33% of the market.
PPS: Could be too harsh on myself there - 33 to 50% of the market

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker

ORIGINAL: Prester John to Wodin

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...

Well, John I must say that a person who leads a debate claiming a knowledge of what the hobby is clamouring for without having researched his assertions really does provide some entertainment - for a short while. John, as you've repeated a few times now I really do believe that you just "don't understand". It is all about the industry's value of it's games:

_____

"WiF: The Computer game... World in Flames(tm) Final(ly) on the computer. The entire world is represented on the European scale on a wrap-around map of the world. At 360 x 195 hexes, this is the largest computer wargame ever produced.

You will no doubt be pleased to hear that we are now in the position of having finalised 95% of the code if you exclude the Artificial Intelligence component. As to the production of the AI, we have had many conflicting views from our customers, some saying we can't produce a version without the AI, others that the AI doesn't matter.

To resolve this issue, ADG has decided to produce a pre-release version of the game which will exclude the AI. This version will be sold at a 33% reduction in price of the final release game (50% discount for LoC subscribers). Furthermore, those who buy the pre-release version will get the final version for 50% off as well. We hope that this approach will satisfy all (or nearly all) our valued customers..."

_____

John - that's ADG before coming on board with Matrix. Seems 66% of retail value in the industry's eyes rests with the AI.

ORIGINAL: Prester John

Of course if you are going to lose more than 10% of your sales accordingly then it is a bad decision.

You're really loosing this debate of yours badly [:)]

Adam.


PS: Got my maths wrong too - 33% of the market.
PPS: Could be too harsh on myself there - 33 to 50% of the market

Umm whatever you reackon. The only thing that I'm debating is that the AI costs money to produce and that money could be used for other things. And I'm also stating that I want to see games produced with more effort put into the rest of the game at the expense of the AI.

Never have I claimed to know what the industry needs, that's all in your mind (along with a few other things). But I do know what I would like to see (no research required there you know). You on the other hand seem to just want to be contrary just because I won't sit back and lap up all your sagely comments about "the industry". Too bad for you I guess. Of course it doesn't affect me either way because I have no doubt's about how the gaming industry is going to keep on going about it's merry way regardless of what I want or you have to say. You take yourself far too seriously in this respect.

Now about the WiF conversion, it was over a year ago that the move to Matrix was announced, and it's likely to be another year before we see a non beta product. I'm not holding my breath on this at all, and I'll be very pragmatic about the final result, with or without AI. As for pricing I refuse to believe anythign other than the total which appears on my credit card bill when I finally get to buy it.

And feel free to explain why a game that features fog-of-war in a two player game needs an AI. I can wait for as long as you wish to prepare an answer but I won't stop asking.

[Adam Parker]

ORIGINAL: Prester John

Never have I claimed to know what the industry needs, that's all in your mind (along with a few other things)...

Oh well John, the basis of your offensive here seems to be personal vindictiveness. So do have fun with yourself - LOL you're playing solitaire afterall [:D]

ORIGINAL: Prester John

And feel free to explain why a game that features fog-of-war in a two player game needs an AI. I can wait for as long as you wish to prepare an answer but I won't stop asking.

Cool! Wasn't my contention [:)] However, it was, that to play a two player game without an umpire and hence fog of war, is to be war gaming circa 1950.

What you still refuse to see is that the very latest board war games released today, carry solitaire ratings.

Either way, you didn't believe the military is investing in war games, that this investment includes financing AI development and that the industry rates the loss of revenue by failing to include an AI, as more than 10% of gross. You've been shown otherwise on all. Might be time for you to pull out an old copy of the General and look up the debate on both solitaire ratings and the virtues of umpired play.

Happy gaming and keep enjoying the hobby. Look forward to seeing your math in getting those geomorphic LOS charts going across every ASL map combination, not withstanding that you're happy to invest in the collection one bit at a time! Just the multitudinous combinations of 2 maps should keep the better of the mathematcians amongst us going for a while. And I'm not declaring I'm anywhere near one of that fraternity - as my previous math attests [:D]

Adam.

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker

ORIGINAL: Prester John

Never have I claimed to know what the industry needs, that's all in your mind (along with a few other things)...

Oh well John, the basis of your offensive here seems to be personal vindictiveness. So do have fun with yourself - LOL you're playing solitaire afterall [:D]

ORIGINAL: Prester John

And feel free to explain why a game that features fog-of-war in a two player game needs an AI. I can wait for as long as you wish to prepare an answer but I won't stop asking.

Cool! Wasn't my contention [:)] However, it was, that to play a two player game without an umpire and hence fog of war, is to be war gaming circa 1950.

What you still refuse to see is that the very latest board war games released today, carry solitaire ratings.

Either way, you didn't believe the military is investing in war games, that this investment includes financing AI development and that the industry rates the loss of revenue by failing to include an AI, as more than 10% of gross. You've been shown otherwise on all. Might be time for you to pull out an old copy of the General and look up the debate on both solitaire ratings and the virtues of umpired play.

Happy gaming and keep enjoying the hobby. Look forward to seeing your math in getting those geomorphic LOS charts going across every ASL map combination, not withstanding that you're happy to invest in the collection one bit at a time! Just the multitudinous combinations of 2 maps should keep the better of the mathematcians amongst us going for a while. And I'm not declaring I'm anywhere near one of that fraternity - as my previous math attests [:D]

Adam.

Oh now that's funny, I didn't think you were taking those numbers I made up seriously. Come on now, I'm trying to drink coffee and you're making me laugh. That is hilarious. I just made up those numbers as examples of how a game like I want could be possible if the numbers were right, because it what it comes down to, numbers, profits and return on investment. Game making is not a charity. Damn I think I'm going to laugh for an hour. You must realise that if my numbers were even half real that AI-less games would be popping up all over the place and my views would be commonplace and not the only person here saying it. Next time I'll have to put "if" in big bold block letters. At least that explains why you are so holier-than-thou, serious about all this. Too bad though, thats your own problem. Oh dear, that IS funny.

Oh and the military is investing a lot in AI and also battlefield simulations, but it's not just for gaming.

But anyway that has nothing to do with your reasons for why an umpired game (a two playered computer game with fog-of-war) that you need an AI. What is the role of the AI when the computer is hiding what the players can't see according to lOS rules etc? Is there a necessity for the AI to move some unit's which are out of the players control? If that is your reason then I can go along with it but that does not seem to be a function of umpiring and fog of war. So why does an umpired game need an AI?

[wodin]

Prester John,

You have been making posts about how you would prefer games without an AI. However you can treally give any valid reasons why it should be the case. All you do is presume. You presume games are held hostage by people who want an AI thus they are never made. You then go onto to economics but the figures you used have no basis in fact. You make the presumption that if a developer doesnt invest in an AI the game will be better. I dont think so. If a developer wants to make a true conversion of ASL with an AI they will. If they want to make a true conversion of ASL without an AI they will. I havent heard of a true wargame made that had to have mechanics cut so they could spend time on the AI. What happens in real life is the game gets delayed.

ALL you will get with a game with no AI is just that a game with no AI. The same game can be released with an AI, you dont have to choose, AI = bad game, No AI = good game. All an AI does is give those who havent the means to play online a chance to play the game. To me there is no harm in that and I truely believe that a game like Squad Battles is no worse off for it.

You also stated that you never claimed knowledge of the Industry.

Read your posts again. For one instance I said that to have games made without an AI is selfish as you are not consdidering other game players. You the stated that those who want an AI are stopping games being made for those who do not. This to me shows some kind of knowledge. You see if you dont know of any, where I sated a fact, you stated a reply with no substance whatsoever.

Youve also made comments about game economics. The you turn around and say youve made them up to back your argument. So all in all as a debater you arent to good. If for instance you showed me evidence of games that ahvent been made as the public want an AI and the developer cant afford it. Or show me a poll where a majority of wargame players would rather buy a game without an AI than wone with then you would have some credibility.

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: wodin

Prester John,

You have been making posts about how you would prefer games without an AI. However you can treally give any valid reasons why it should be the case. All you do is presume. You presume games are held hostage by people who want an AI thus they are never made. You then go onto to economics but the figures you used have no basis in fact. You make the presumption that if a developer doesnt invest in an AI the game will be better. I dont think so. If a developer wants to make a true conversion of ASL with an AI they will. If they want to make a true conversion of ASL without an AI they will. I havent heard of a true wargame made that had to have mechanics cut so they could spend time on the AI. What happens in real life is the game gets delayed.

All right lets go through this slowly. I am not presuming that I would like to own ASL and WiF that are played exactly the same way as the board games are (not PBEM). I know that is what I want. I also know that these games will never be made that way because they don't accommodate the unwashed masses who insist upon an AI. And nobody cuts effort on an AI because they are usually so bad that they need all the help they can get. More likely is that other things get cut (like PBEM security) so that more work can be done on the AI.

ALL you will get with a game with no AI is just that a game with no AI. The same game can be released with an AI, you dont have to choose, AI = bad game, No AI = good game. All an AI does is give those who havent the means to play online a chance to play the game. To me there is no harm in that and I truely believe that a game like Squad Battles is no worse off for it.

But if a reasonable AI is impossible to produce then the game is therefore impossible to produce, right?

You also stated that you never claimed knowledge of the Industry.

Read your posts again. For one instance I said that to have games made without an AI is selfish as you are not consdidering other game players. You the stated that those who want an AI are stopping games being made for those who do not. This to me shows some kind of knowledge. You see if you dont know of any, where I sated a fact, you stated a reply with no substance whatsoever.

Youve also made comments about game economics. The you turn around and say youve made them up to back your argument. So all in all as a debater you arent to good. If for instance you showed me evidence of games that ahvent been made as the public want an AI and the developer cant afford it. Or show me a poll where a majority of wargame players would rather buy a game without an AI than wone with then you would have some credibility.

I've made comments about the principles of economics and I've generated made up numbers as examples for those principles. Now if you are too silly to realise the difference then that is your own problem. If you think that game publishers operate as charities then you are sadly mistaken. If they come out in the red their business fails unless they have a rich uncle. This is a fact that I am familiar with.

Another other fact is that you do not have to have an AI to sell a game. Of course you may not sell any, but the AI or lack thereof is not a prerequisite to selling a game and this is proved by the number of board games being sold around the place. The last fact is that producing an AI costs money to program. Do you still deny any of these facts?

Now has that sunk in? Games do not need an AI and I'm the only one sitting here saying that I'd like to see AI-less PC versions of good games therefore they are very unlikely to see as a replacement for boardgames. Therefore I'm going to be stuck with using my dining room table as a game table for some time, and games not being any quicker to play or set up than they could be if they were in a computer game format.

And lastly, since you haven't bothered to mention it yet, how good does an AI have to be to count as an AI for you? Does it have to be able to beat the average player 50% of the time? Does it even have to be able to beat the average player. Just what sort of programming effort counts as an AI? I could see ASL being made with an AI that could move a few counters around in the general direction of the VC's but not having any skill at all when it comes to correct use of fire groups and phases. In other words it would offer no challenge at all, just target practice. Do you still count that as an AI? If so then it will be quite easy produce to AI for a lot of board games with only a week of programming. Would that satisfy your demands for an AI? I just want to see how selfish you are in your requirements of an AI that at least one person doesn't want.

[wodin]

All I want is for myself and others to be able to play a game without the need for another human. THATS THE BEAUTY OF PC WARGAMES!! Ive palyed a fair few games SB,HTTR and CM come to mind where the AI was good enough to beat me and its beaten others. It can be done.

You dont want an AI because setting up your boardgame takes to long.

Why dont you take a programming course and develop it yourself?

You already have VASL and aide so I cant see what your complaining about. What you want is covered.

Finally have you played Squad Battles or HTTR? I think you will find the AI is good enough and Im certain the games havent suffered because its included. AND you can actually play against another human!! The miralce of modern technology:)

Thats me signing off on this post. Ive said what I wanted to say and I sense this man is getting rather angry. He is also insulting. I did say he was selfish but I feel his wants are. I know Im not.

[LewFisher]

I think Mr. P. John is just having a little fun with us[:-]

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: wodin

All I want is for myself and others to be able to play a game without the need for another human. THATS THE BEAUTY OF PC WARGAMES!!

You dont want an AI because setting up your boardgame takes to long.

Why dont you take a programming course and develop it yourself?

You already have VASL and aide so I cant see what your complaining about. What you want is covered.

No it's not covered. Pay attention here. The rules need to be built in to speed up play too. Removing the physical board is only half of it. The rest is about controlling the rules and making the game even easier to play.

Develop it myself? I have a full time job where I earn money to spend on my hobbies (amongst other things). I quite happily pay a lot for what I want for the express purpose of not having to learn to do it myself.

Anyway I take it that the facts have finally sunk in.

Now what about your opinion of what is a reasonable AI? And when is a reasonabale AI not possible?

[wodin]

No need to wag the finger.

CM,SB and HTTR all have an AI which is fine and many are happy with it.

Your tone is very arrogant and condensending. I bet youve got a few peoples back up on forums before now.

[LewFisher]

I was wagging the finger at Mr. P. John. I am on your side i like games with A.I. You seem a bit touchy?

[PresbyterJohn]

Look folks I'm sorry if there are some of you don't like playing games against other people but I do. And I want to do it as easily as possible. Will I get what I want. Not likely. Will more games be made with woeful AI to keep Wodin happy. Yep, by the dozen. Of course woeful is my description. What I now want to know is what woeful really is. Wodin gives me the impression that it just has to move and fire a few counters and that makes it an AI regardless of it's ability to beat the average player. And Mr Parker says "That umpire is also known as Fog of War and FOW is best applied via an AI." He appears to have a completely different idea which he also refuses to explain.

So anyway what is an acceptable AI that you folks are happy to pay for?

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: LewFisher

I think Mr. P. John is just having a little fun with us[:-]

So you noticed that nobody complained when I said dump the AI in favour of better rule books or manuals. I thought that was rather odd but never mind.

[LewFisher]

There are chess programs out there that play at a master's level (try their A.I. on for size). However, with chess, there is a limited number of squares and one primary victory condition. With most wargames being so complex, with so many hexes and victory conditions, there probably will never be an A.I. that would satisfy you or play on a master level. Here is one method to solve the problem. Stop trying to beat the A.I. just play the game was if you were a real battlefield commander. That's what I have done in the past for games with lesser A.I.'s. [:)]

[LewFisher]

Actually, I have printed out the rules books for Matrix's games. I have them binded at Kinko's. Tehy look pretty good.

However, I agree with you I would like to see computer games come out better playtested and with better rules. I would even pay more for the games - say $110.00 instead of $80.00.

I should add, compared to most companies, SSG's games come out well developed with excellent tutorials.

[PresbyterJohn]

ORIGINAL: LewFisher

There are chess programs out there that play at a master's level (try their A.I. on for size). However, with chess, there is a limited number of squares and one primary victory condition. With most wargames being so complex, with so many hexes and victory conditions, there probably will never be an A.I. that would satisfy you or play on a master level. Here is one method to solve the problem. Stop trying to beat the A.I. just play the game was if you were a real battlefield commander. That's what I have done in the past for games with lesser A.I.'s. [:)]

Oh yes, I agree that there will probably never be a master level AI for complex wargames like ASL and WiF. Now I'm not specifically saying that the AI has to satisfy me, but I think it has to be worth the money. And that's why I'm asking what makes a decent AI, with some sort of level being set by it's ability to beat the "average player" some percentage of the time.