Hi Larsenex,

I don't think I missed anything. When the game is released, computer player game levels above "Normal" will cheat; they will not be any "better" players, they will have advantages human players won't.  Note my thesis, that the game should be able to at least tie anyone without any cheats (and ignoring random events).  So, according to me, if the "AI is completed", then there is no need for a level beyond "Normal".  I don't remember Deep Blue saying, "Hey, Gary Kasparov! Look over there!", and then stealing a piece off the board.   That's what I mean for setting the bar low.

I thank you for your feedback, but you didn't really answer my question. Does it disappoint you that the game will have to cheat to give you a challenge? You see, it's playing a different game than you are. I find something less satisfying about that.

Dude. You are asking a question that does not exist and had no answer. I can't feel disappointed at the "AI" cheating to win, when the AI learns from you every game, and uses all its processing power and algorithms at normal difficultly. I standard which you would draw the line on. Like you said, anything past that would be a extra challenge, (not to mention its all moddable) so when the AI can't get smarter than, people like to give the AI bonuses because its all you can do after that to make the gam harder.

DARCA.

deleted

I agree with blue oyster i want a smarter ai not one that gets bonuses you don't.  Me and erschild can't converse on ai. For the reason that arbitrary bonuses is cheating. According to the forums the ai is going to work in four ways. On normal the ai is going to borrow your ship designs when you make better ships,  and have an adaptive ai. Im happy with a game going to adapt to my tactics. In time normal will get insanely hard. Now at harder levels it's going to cheat. One thing i learned about reading about the community update posts is that you can mod a harder game. Please can someone make an insanely hard mod without cheating. Possibly multiples.

In a traditional game like Go or even Golf, a better player will receive a "handicap" in recognition of being the better player. This is not considered "cheating". It merely evens the odds.

Having experience in both programming and AI, I can say it's virtually impossible to create a 4X game AI that will beat experienced human players. The only way to compensate is to give the human player a handicap. (Or conversely, by giving the computer players a bonus.)

Of course I would love an adaptable super-genius game AI. But I understand why that will never happen: complexity of the game's rules, small team, limited time and budget, etc.

If anyone thinks they can do better, try it

Don't forget that the AI has to do more than win.  An AI that only tries to win gives you vanilla civ 5, which imo takes a lot of fun out of the game.

In gal civ players need to be able to manipulate the AI.  From simply researching diplomacy techs to get better trades and increased friendliness out of the AI to allying with it and keeping that alliance while the player goes for one of the victory conditions.   The AIs also need to behave differently (and therefore not optimally) to make the game more interesting.  ie some are predispositioned to being friendly or hostile, traders, expansionist, going for influence, etc.

Because of this the player has advantages the AI doesn't.  Bonuses at higher levels is pretty much the only way to go.

I'm not sure where to start. The question exists, of course. And, no, the AI doesn't learn from you every (or even a single) game.  And, although I cannot be sure at this time, the kind of mods possible are not likely to include any kind of sophisticated AI work, but instead most likely manually tweaking values and parameters and similar things. This is pure speculation, and I will try to remember to backtrack when the day comes we can prove otherwise. I would be happy to be mistaken about this.  We'll see. But I'll put you down as "Undecided."

Hello erischild,

I don't insist on the word "cheat"; it is not deliberate flag waving. You should know that a keyboard command that automatically gives one more gold or ships outside the normal play of a game is often called a "cheat." And for decades, we've been trying to do AI without "cheating." Kindly consider it a term of art, please.

That is true.

There is a lot to agree with there, but I think you are talking about balancing. I system that can plan, form strategies, and execute tactics to achieve those strategies has that structure designed in from the beginning. One isn't going to add it later. It would be fabulously expensive. And besides, we're talking about plans revealed today that say they will STOP improving the AI, and after that rely on che...um, I mean, special benefits that are outside the rules under which the human player must operate.

I never represented myself as having skill at this game.

Sorry, I'm completely baffled by that last sentence. I am trying to find out if other people feel disappointed by the fact it's been decided to create more difficult levels of play without using what is widely termed "AI".  You see, giving the computer disadvantages and advantages is a way to create all sort of levels of play; but there are other ways, too, and they provide a richness, so why abandon them after using them? It disappoints me. I wonder if it disappoints others.

im sorry but did i miss part of the dev stream ill admit i was tired and nodding off but i dont recall them saying 'well we got the ai to the point where it can beat a 7th grader now we will just give it some bonus's and hope for the best'

Hello leiavoia,

So you're saying that chess and football and darts and foosball aren't traditional games because players don't get handicaps?

Oh my well I guess that settles it...except hey wait a minute, I'VE got experience, too! Oh dear now we've created a paradox. Since you're claiming the absolute, that it's virtually impossible, would you mind pointing us to your published, peer-reviewed paper (or someone else's equivalent) that settles this question?  I believe the claim to be false.

You've declared that the computer can't get very good, so your argument is circular.

Much more difficult things than this have been achieved. And I'm sure you're right about the size of the team and the limited budget as major drivers. Hey, wait a minute, just a little ways up above you said because of your experience you could say it was:

So...which is it? Impossible? Or a matter of resources? Hyperbole?

But, the question is, does it disappoint you?

Let's assume everyone at stardock hasn't changed who they are. After galactic civilizations 2 twilight of the arnor came out they left code alone. They made four patches. This was modifying text files,  but not playing with code,  untill the community update. Now what would keep them from doing the same thing. They had two broken ai's. Which translate to five retarded races. Even with five retarded races they wouldn't fix the ai with four patches. Thid time i hope your right and they will adjust the code not just text files as we go. Ps. Adjsting text files is better than nothing.  It bothers me tjat they use bonuses instead if a harder ai. Please someone make an advanced mod for people who need a better chalange without giving the ai better bonuses.

I think you are confused about what this means. Even if they tripled the AI complexity, they would still set it to normal. Maximum AI complexity is just labeled normal.