At this point it wouldn't make sense for IV to do anything. With Multiwinia and Subversion taking up resources it doesn't make financial sense to revamp the single player game of DEFCON, especially since the majority of people who would likely get the update are those who play online anyway. Unlike a Vista patch or something similar it's not really extending the life of the game, and since the game isn't broken as it is I don't expect them to do anything.
Further, I think the idea of modded AI was talked about before, and it was said that you couldn't really do it without really tinkering with the code. I'll try to dig that up.
CPU Silos
Moderator: Defcon moderators
- tllotpfkamvpe
- level5
- Posts: 1698
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 12:04 am
- tllotpfkamvpe
- level5
- Posts: 1698
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 12:04 am
- bert_the_turtle
- level5
- Posts: 4795
- Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 6:11 pm
- Location: Cologne
- Contact:
Nope, the CPU is handled on the clients. The server could in theory emulate CPU players by taking over a human player, but then there is the unsolvable problem that the server has no clue about the gamestate.tllotpfkamvpe wrote:Is it bert to the rescue again?
How about someone make a mod with new AI markers? That could change at least the placements.
tllotpfkamvpe wrote:Yes it would make a lot of sense, simply because it would be better to have a finished game, the best way that it could ever be. It's not all about financial profit and rolling out new games. Also it does not take a huge amount of effort.
I don't have even the slightest experience with coding, so I have no idea what amount of effort it would take. As far as having a game "the best way that it could be" would mean an unending amount of updates. There isn't a game out there that is the "best it could be", and any effort to produce such a game would be financial suicide of the company that undertook it. I prefer IV in business and making games, not going bankrupt in a never ending quest for perfection.
tllotpfkamvpe wrote:This game was made to stand the test of time thats why I think IV should finish the AI aspect of the game because it is also crucial to the computer simulation bit of the wargames movie. It does not make sense that a human can beat a duel core in thermonuclear war.
Again, there isn't an AI out there that can survive the test of time. Every one ever created has limitations, and it is only the human element that can create a continually unique experience. While single player games are great, Darwinia being an example, the AI does not and can not stand the test of time except as a testament to the abilities available at it's inception.
As for a human beating a duel core, while a computer chip can process things quickly it is limited by it's programing. Only the human mind is capable of abstract thought, and that is far more valuable then being able to process numbers quickly. Until actual AI is created, a program is only as clever as the programmers, and due to evolving ideas and tactics there is no way for IV to create an AI that can match a human, especially since there are hidden factors such as fog of war. It isn't chess where you have set pieces, movements, and squares.
Would it be possible for the dedicated server to use "fake" AI? i.e. have several layouts for each continent, randomly choose one, pretend to be a real player to place the units, then "drop" from the game to let the client-side AI's take over? Or does the server no know which continent it has been assigned to?
xander
xander
- tllotpfkamvpe
- level5
- Posts: 1698
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 12:04 am
- tllotpfkamvpe
- level5
- Posts: 1698
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 12:04 am
-
- level4
- Posts: 657
- Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:58 pm
- Location: Kashyyyk / Cambridge (commuting)
- bert_the_turtle
- level5
- Posts: 4795
- Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 6:11 pm
- Location: Cologne
- Contact:
xander: Currently, when the regular method of random territories is used, the server has no clue who gets which territory. Of course, it is possible to let the server do the random territory selection, and then replay for each AI player a set of prerecorded placements. It may even fake "learning" to play by stealing the placements from successful human players. I don't see much point to bother, though; it won't make the AI that replaces dropped players better, and to train against specific set scenarios (with full control of the CPU over the enemy units), there already is JoinAs.
The AI markers are a dead end too, of course. Either I'm stupid (and I haven't read the modding documentation threads, too lazy) or you can't tell the AI where to place land units with it.
/ignore topfplanze
The AI markers are a dead end too, of course. Either I'm stupid (and I haven't read the modding documentation threads, too lazy) or you can't tell the AI where to place land units with it.
/ignore topfplanze
- tllotpfkamvpe
- level5
- Posts: 1698
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 12:04 am
- All American Mobster
- level4
- Posts: 751
- Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 11:46 pm
- Location: Upland, CA
- Contact:
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests