Different AIs

[Quatre]

posted on February 3rd, 2011, 5:22 pm

Last edited by Quatre on February 3rd, 2011, 5:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

After seeing some onlinebattles, reading Boggz how tos and playing Supreme Commander after a long while, I noticed I miss something in Fleetops.
Different AIs. I'm not talking about the difficult of an AI but how the AI will play and build.
Even with the implementation of the AI this would be possible i think. The buildorders will be, a little different  attackbehavior maybee would

I think about different buildorders and main focuses of building.
The AI now techs up asap and then spams all ships it can build, attacks agressiv and turtle at the same time. But only it have the recources.

AI 1 would be the low tech and because of the shipcosts the spamming AI.
It would work after the idear just teching up if needed. For Klings it would mostly build small yard ships and maybee after some time a small number of the medium yard and nearly no ships of the big yard.
This AI as Federation would build a higher number of small yards und would heavily reli on Sabers, Intrepids and Moosons. Very rare tire 2 ships and nearly no tier 3 ships. But it would go for warpin after some time.
In short. Lotechships (but with specials) and very slow teching up but many ships.

The 2. AI would be the total different. A hightechAI. It will tech up even faster then the normal AI, it will nearly ignore the smaller ships (and yards) and nearly just build battleships (for Borg Spheres are ok to).

The 3. would be an very defencive AI. It will build many bases and turrets and will have big fleets at the expansions (if possible).
It should build mostly midtechships (see below)
It would attack not very often but in huge numbers.

The 4. would be an very agressive AI. They would mostly buld midtechships but very rare defencives. As Kling it would use mostle the med. yard and the Vorach and as Fed the baselinevessel would be the Akira. but they will tech up and build all ships but mostly midtechships
It would attack very often at all possible expansions (if possible to mod) and harras with small groups of ships. And huge Fleets


AI 1, 2 and 4 would build far less stations and turrets then the AI now because they concentrate on ships

This could be joined with the difficultsetting or it could one setting in the instand action menu.


The 5. AI would be the normal AI we have now.

And sorry for bad english. I don't write in this language very often.

posted on February 3rd, 2011, 5:47 pm

I like this!

[entryman]

posted on February 3rd, 2011, 6:20 pm

Last edited by entryman on February 3rd, 2011, 6:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I like this idea a lot. It would give anybody playing against computer AI the ability to make the game more challenging or more fun








"Command and compassion is a fool's mixture"
Mitchell to Kirk- TOS "Where No Man Has Gone Before" 

posted on February 3rd, 2011, 6:23 pm

Didn't Armada 2 already do that? I could have sworn it already did it and it was removed from FO because it didn't work in some way.

posted on February 3rd, 2011, 6:37 pm

Don't know if A2 did it already, but i like the idea of specific defensive/offensive AI

posted on February 3rd, 2011, 9:10 pm

I love this. The aggressive one might be kinda hard to do, but would be pretty awesome. The turtle one would be easy as hell to do, just remove the attack logic. It'd be fun to let the computer build a ridiculous massive crazy fleet and just hold it around their base waiting for the inevitable clusterf*&$.

posted on February 4th, 2011, 7:44 pm

Kind of like in the newer C&Cs, I like the idea !

posted on February 4th, 2011, 8:41 pm

oh ok cool so like a rusher, turtle, builder.... that sort of thing?

posted on February 4th, 2011, 9:30 pm

oh ok cool so like a rusher, turtle, builder.... that sort of thing?

Like that. Only in C&C Generals ZH those AI became generals to choose from

posted on February 4th, 2011, 9:33 pm

In C&C 3 and red alert 3 you could choose your AI's from this kind of stuff if I remember correctly. Agressive ones, turtling ones..Steamroller AI's..

posted on February 4th, 2011, 9:33 pm

In C&C 3 and red alert 3 you could choose your AI's from this kind of stuff if I remember correctly. Agressive ones, turtling ones..Steamroller AI's..

Those i haven't played.

posted on February 4th, 2011, 9:47 pm

Ok, Realilistic implication. Instead of having preset difficulty sets for the ai, How about a ai settings menu in the instant action menu, that way you could specificaly design and handycap each ai for the type of game you want,(Spaming Little guy, Tuttrleing, Quick tech, Technobable tactical Engagements)

[Quatre]

posted on February 4th, 2011, 10:55 pm

Last edited by Quatre on February 4th, 2011, 11:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

My thoughts where more inspired by Supreme Commander 1.
There you can choose an adaptiv AI (jumps between the different AI-types), a turteling AI, a teching AI and a "storm" AI. An a random one.
But there are chooseable in different difficults.
My own idear was the not teching but spamming AI (inspired by matches where the highest vessel that was build was a Vorach).
The dificulty sets should be there to. Because they define how strong the AI is and how high the bonuses are. You can't change this just with handycap.

I think because how the Armada AI is made. The only possible (and easiest) way would be to make 15 AIs out of the existing 3. Turteling, teching, agressiv and lowtech/spamming for every difficult setting (normal, hard and merciless) = 12 and the present standard AIs (3 + 12 = 15).
This would look like in Supcom.
A random for every difficult would be cool to.

I don't think you can isolate the AI from the difficult.


The pic is the AI menue in Supreme Commander
easy
normal
adaptive
storm
turtle
tech
random
adaptive (merciless )
storm (merciless)
turtle (merciless)
tech (merciless) (not in pic)
random (merciless) (not in pic)

They have 3 difficults but for easy are no editet AIs and for the highest AIs there is no normal AI.
I think for the normal AI in Fleetops we don't need different behaviors.

Attachments

posted on February 9th, 2011, 6:03 pm

I would like that as well who wouldn't...

Something like that would be very cool.. Like you guys mentioned many games do that in the present days.. Modern C&C games Supreme Commander the AI in Sins of a Solar empire etc.

Another interesting aspect would be if you could make the ai learning.

The Homeworld series had that kind of feature. On the end of a skirmish match there was a file created with your stats how many ships did you build how did you played.. Did you rushed early or were capturing many ships during the last game as what faction did you play etc.

So when rushed early in the game with many fighters and ambushed resource operations. The first thing the ai did in the next game was it to build anti fighter craft and also escorted the harvesters. Then first the remaining regular stuff.

In the end it's just a collection of the players gaming style and then countering it in tactics and production.

posted on February 10th, 2011, 4:35 am

After seeing some onlinebattles, reading Boggz how tos and playing Supreme Commander after a long while, I noticed I miss something in Fleetops.
Different AIs. I'm not talking about the difficult of an AI but how the AI will play and build.
Even with the implementation of the AI this would be possible i think. The buildorders will be, a little different  attackbehavior maybee would

I think about different buildorders and main focuses of building.
The AI now techs up asap and then spams all ships it can build, attacks agressiv and turtle at the same time. But only it have the recources.

AI 1 would be the low tech and because of the shipcosts the spamming AI.
It would work after the idear just teching up if needed. For Klings it would mostly build small yard ships and maybee after some time a small number of the medium yard and nearly no ships of the big yard.
This AI as Federation would build a higher number of small yards und would heavily reli on Sabers, Intrepids and Moosons. Very rare tire 2 ships and nearly no tier 3 ships. But it would go for warpin after some time.
In short. Lotechships (but with specials) and very slow teching up but many ships.

The 2. AI would be the total different. A hightechAI. It will tech up even faster then the normal AI, it will nearly ignore the smaller ships (and yards) and nearly just build battleships (for Borg Spheres are ok to).

The 3. would be an very defencive AI. It will build many bases and turrets and will have big fleets at the expansions (if possible).
It should build mostly midtechships (see below)
It would attack not very often but in huge numbers.

The 4. would be an very agressive AI. They would mostly buld midtechships but very rare defencives. As Kling it would use mostle the med. yard and the Vorach and as Fed the baselinevessel would be the Akira. but they will tech up and build all ships but mostly midtechships
It would attack very often at all possible expansions (if possible to mod) and harras with small groups of ships. And huge Fleets


AI 1, 2 and 4 would build far less stations and turrets then the AI now because they concentrate on ships

This could be joined with the difficultsetting or it could one setting in the instand action menu.


The 5. AI would be the normal AI we have now.

And sorry for bad english. I don't write in this language very often.

Been down this route quite a few times with regards to Ai development in Fleetops, The ideas are great tbh and we all want them.

I just don't really see how at the moment, I've been away from the AI files fora year or so now but even back as far as 04 I can remember all kinds of attempts to sort out the Ai in Armada and pretty much I have to say it's terrible. RedmanMark looked into it quite a bit and from what I remember of the code it's pretty rudimentary.

Oh that and the Ai cheats btw, it doesn't harvest any resources which I find annoying.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the A2 Ai works by using a While loop which limits what can be done with it 


Anyway I'll let someone else here answer, I'm out of touch with the recent FO developments