Home » Stars! 2.6/7 » The Academy » Player assistant "AI"
| Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech |
Mon, 06 March 2006 11:41   |
|
 m.a@stars |
 | Commander |
Messages: 2765
Registered: October 2004
Location: Third star to the left | |
|
| Kotk wrote on Mon, 06 March 2006 17:10 |
| m.a@stars wrote on Mon, 06 March 2006 13:22 |
Actually, my current scripts do find the "breeders" by themselves, based on pop growth. They also allow for a "shared" definition of said "breeder cap", i.e: the script suggests and the player vetoes (or not). 
Indeed, having the player set up a list of "breeders" and a list of "needers" would make things simpler for the AI. 
|
With real AI (that plays for itself) it is simple to toss together some formula and let to calculate answer to each of the questions. Formulas can never be "ultimate" but "close enough" is OK for AI opponent. OTOH if assistant AI decides lots of things on its own in players turn then player starts to object ("why it tries to carry pop away from my sweet ironium candy world?").
|
Because your "Iron candy" world is growing 55k pop a year and you colonised a strategic outpost less than 200ly away and you have absolutely no other breeder at hand, so skimming 30k pop from said "Iron candy" is actually best option? 
Pls note than my "production" script could actually place a veto on moving pop and/or minerals away from the best shipbuilding sites. 
| Quote: |
 "it is needer until its full"
 "it is full"
|
Both of those are automatically handled using pop growth as deciding factor.
| Quote: |
For AR following upgrade path of his orbitals is a priority. Orbital means capacity of planet and all "planetary" defense AR got, no much else to build on planet. There the problem is to have minerals. For rest of the PRTs orbital is source of ability to gate forces around and/or to build ships. If it cant build orbital then its too weak planet anyway and only its strategic location may somewhat matter. Now if AI starts to bugger some late game player about his pesky stations with slot of gatlings and slot of wolverine shields ... then it is annoying for player. He does not care. Only 3% of his opponents nubians can kill any theoretically possible station, so why to build it full and waste minerals.
|
You must be talking about actual AI. My proposed "production helper" would indeed confine itself to making sure SB upgrades (if any was proposed) went the smoothest possible way in all suitable worlds, or warn of any problem. 
In fact, one of the reasons for suggesting some SB to be upgraded would be relative popularity of the old and new designs. 
| Quote: |
 SD is actually a very popular PRT among experienced players. It takes up to 2 times power to compete with a good SD.
|
All the more reason to evolve tools to at least reduce the MM in doing so.
| Quote: |
Only thing ... the turn file that SD submits is usually ~2 times bigger than that of others.
|
You should see some of my JoaT turns.
| Quote: |
If some major part of that SDs MM can be at least semi-properly automated then games will turn into SD slugfests where most play SD and minority play useful sidekicks to SD.
|
I don't think it would be easy to evolve an automaton to actually improve an SD handling of offensive/defensive/multilayered minefields. And if it was indeed doable, perhaps some other PRTs would acquire at least some of the benefits of expert SDs?
Alternatively, send SD to the same ban limbo as CA.
By the way, someone should tell the Admiral that my name is not an email address. 
...
So many Stars, so few Missiles!
In space no one can hear you scheme!  Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Player assistant "AI"
By: wumpus on Sat, 04 March 2006 16:54 |
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
|
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
By: wumpus on Sun, 05 March 2006 06:18 |
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
By: Kotk on Mon, 06 March 2006 01:25 |
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
|
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
By: Kotk on Mon, 06 March 2006 05:24 |
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
|
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
By: Kotk on Mon, 06 March 2006 04:43 |
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
|
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
By: Kotk on Mon, 06 March 2006 11:10 |
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
|
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
|
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
|
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
|
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
|
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
|
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
By: wumpus on Mon, 06 March 2006 12:43 |
|
|
Re: BattleSim with arbitrary tech
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
By: joseph on Mon, 06 March 2006 17:06 |
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
By: Kotk on Tue, 07 March 2006 14:25 |
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
By: joseph on Tue, 07 March 2006 17:05 |
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
By: Kotk on Tue, 07 March 2006 19:43 |
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
By: Madman on Wed, 08 March 2006 00:48 |
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
By: Kotk on Tue, 07 March 2006 14:08 |
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
By: Kotk on Wed, 08 March 2006 08:49 |
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
By: Kotk on Wed, 08 March 2006 13:37 |
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
By: joseph on Wed, 08 March 2006 16:54 |
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
By: Madman on Thu, 16 March 2006 06:45 |
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
By: Kotk on Thu, 16 March 2006 12:40 |
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
By: Kotk on Thu, 09 March 2006 08:16 |
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
By: mazda on Wed, 15 March 2006 09:58 |
|
|
Re: Player assistant "AI"
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Jul 04 09:11:38 EDT 2024
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
