I stopped pushing for the bets AI a while ago. A 3 man team fo KAI sapped all the fun out of it and there was no motivation for that goal anymore.
Why else would AAI 0.7 have no major new features, yet a truckload of fixes, tweaks, and rearrangements aswell as config additions? The number of ammendments and fixes in AAI 0.7 far out numbers new features. The same with NTai XE9RC22, the majority of major new additions that affect gameplay come in the form of buildtrees and the necessary support for them being fixed.
This has become more of a popularity contest than a who has the best AI and it seems the only people bothered about best AI now are the KAI camp and the non-ai dev people who respond in this forum. Of the new projects I've noticed come to fruition, none are aiming at the pinnacle of AI difficulty, they're aimed more at low cpu usage and maximum performance for minimal dev time and resources. Heck one of the major changes for Epic is believe it or not 'load balancing'
Fight club (AI's)
Moderators: hoijui, Moderators
and then the developwer of the über-AI gets lazy over his succes while the beaten AI developers work double shifts to catch up. all in all it seems like an evolutionary process. in bavaria we have a saying that goes like this: "a guada hoits aus und um an schlechtn is ned zu schad."AF wrote:What sue is competitive competition if an AI succeeds in driving the other AI's out and creating a monopoly, stifling development and locking everyone into a single AI, ending fast paced competitive development.
translation: "a good one will survive bad times while you dont have to feel sorry for a bad one". since all AI developers show the spirit to make their AI better and better i count them to the good ones who will see through bad times.
motivation only goes so far, and it can dwindle and falter.
afterall what happened to SAI ZcAIn QAI and TAI?
Just look at AA to see what a monopoly can do to things, there wont be any chance of any other mdo toppling AA soon regardless of wether they're 1000x better than AA or not
ee ftw!
On a side note. The age of the super AI has yet to arrive.
afterall what happened to SAI ZcAIn QAI and TAI?
Just look at AA to see what a monopoly can do to things, there wont be any chance of any other mdo toppling AA soon regardless of wether they're 1000x better than AA or not
ee ftw!
On a side note. The age of the super AI has yet to arrive.
-
hollowsoul
- Posts: 665
- Joined: 06 Jun 2006, 19:49
Blah if ai dev's dont want a option to give ai's level playin ground
(thats not on by default i.e u got to go outof your way to turn it on)
Shame on them
At very least would be interesting to see how they stack, either way i rather play against multiple ai's myself.
Nothing like playin against different ai / styles, to avoid pickin up any bad habbits (i.e bad habbit works against a certain AI, play online & peep = crush u for doing that).
(thats not on by default i.e u got to go outof your way to turn it on)
Shame on them
At very least would be interesting to see how they stack, either way i rather play against multiple ai's myself.
Nothing like playin against different ai / styles, to avoid pickin up any bad habbits (i.e bad habbit works against a certain AI, play online & peep = crush u for doing that).
-
Lindir The Green
- Posts: 815
- Joined: 04 May 2005, 15:09
Well, I think that the only problem with the Spring AIs is that 2/3 of them are closed source, which makes it so that, while they may remain unbeaten by the other AIs, they will not be nearly as good as if they could use each other's ideas.
Making a closed source AI for an open source game just seems pointlessly competitive.
Making a closed source AI for an open source game just seems pointlessly competitive.
It's an issue as soon as they use sprign ehaders. And sicne there's no way of making the AI work without suign spring headers, they're automatically requried to be GPL'ed, forcing them to eb opensource.
Any closed source AI's must therefore change engine or risk being in vioaltion of the GPL of spring.
Thus it's perfectly possible that Spring devs could force KAI to stop dev and either go opensource or change engines. They can also prevent it being distributed as far as I am aware for as long as it is in violation which it is.
hmm I have AAI source to commit.
Any closed source AI's must therefore change engine or risk being in vioaltion of the GPL of spring.
Thus it's perfectly possible that Spring devs could force KAI to stop dev and either go opensource or change engines. They can also prevent it being distributed as far as I am aware for as long as it is in violation which it is.
hmm I have AAI source to commit.
I'm going to come out strongly in agreement with AF here, the kind of competition talked about in this thread wouldn't be helpful for AI development. I want AI's to be designed to cheat if they want. I want AI's to be designed to use low CPU resources, even if that drops performance a little. I want AI's that have a million and one different design goals, rather than a slugfest to be the "best" that leaves us with one "winner" AI and a bunch of underdogs that just get demoralized.
EDIT: Note that the "open source / close source" thing is not really my department. This is more about the fight club idea.
EDIT: Note that the "open source / close source" thing is not really my department. This is more about the fight club idea.
I like AF's A.I a LOT more then KIA. Why? Cause fighting KAI is like trying oneself to a post then giving a semi-automatic, high caliber pistol to a blind psycokiller and telling them to fire randomly until they hit you. IE a dumb death that will win by cheating, cause it turns out that you have a blind fold, but he's not actually blind.
AI development also encourages further aspects.
GroupAI's spring unit AI behaviour patches, and further development.
For example NTai taught me the skills necessary to create all my other creations and get to grips with many other things. Look at darkstars and my groupAI or AFLobby or Cookiebot for that. Heck a year ago the NSIS script for my new installer would be baffling to me.
That and that style of competition leaves a nasty atmosphere that in itself demoralises without need for progress to occur in any AI. It encourages paranoia, suspiscion, and closed source projects with hidden agendas.
GroupAI's spring unit AI behaviour patches, and further development.
For example NTai taught me the skills necessary to create all my other creations and get to grips with many other things. Look at darkstars and my groupAI or AFLobby or Cookiebot for that. Heck a year ago the NSIS script for my new installer would be baffling to me.
That and that style of competition leaves a nasty atmosphere that in itself demoralises without need for progress to occur in any AI. It encourages paranoia, suspiscion, and closed source projects with hidden agendas.
AAI is compatible with a lot of mods.
For example, FF, which normally crashes other AIs, (lack of buildtrees, I think) has AAI fighting epic battles with me.
Even though this pic is on Speedmetal, it does the same kind of epic wars on other maps.
NTAI has come a long way from the first version I tried, but i'm not so sure about it's fighting ability.
KAI is just ownage, not very compatible with other mods though.
For example, FF, which normally crashes other AIs, (lack of buildtrees, I think) has AAI fighting epic battles with me.
Even though this pic is on Speedmetal, it does the same kind of epic wars on other maps.
NTAI has come a long way from the first version I tried, but i'm not so sure about it's fighting ability.
KAI is just ownage, not very compatible with other mods though.
So.. what's the point here? AI devs decide what they want: new features, bugfixes, mod compatibility, open/closed source, etc. This talk is all about nothing. Let them do what they want, they're beginning to get quite good at itErom wrote:I.....
I.....
I.....
Back to the thread topic here: what makes KAI this good? I like the micro!
-
Tim Blokdijk
- Posts: 1242
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 11:18
-
unpossible
- Posts: 871
- Joined: 10 May 2005, 19:24
I agree.Acidd_UK wrote:This is exactly what I would like to see - in this way, all the AI developers are pushing to develop the 'best' AI. When one comes up with an innovotive feature that enables it to regularly beat the other AIs, then the onus would be on the other AIs to find a way to counter that feature, or copy it themselves (and in the process probably improve it). As such, this would drive AIs to creating more and more 'human-like' features and eventually make them human-competetive (without cheating) - which IMHO is the real goal of general AI.
I know some people have some quite strong views on why an AI should be able to cheat vs a human, but I don't think that developing an AI to cheat from the start is a good 'habit' to be in...
I think that a regular, automatic, online AI vs AI tournament, with published results, would be good. I can't see how this would fail to drive the evolution of better AIs. It wouldn't matter if your AI was unpopular with human players, for whatever reason: all it would need to do is beat the other AIs, and it would be on top of the scoreboard. Replays would be made available so that the losers could improve their AIs for the next tournament.
This is a meritocracy for AI. It's a bit like T Robots or Core Wars, but with a more interesting game... And with open source AIs, the genes of each competitor can be improved by anyone! Is there any other RTS game with that sort of feature? Could this be a first for Spring?
(Of course, cheating would have to be prevented in some way, or the competition wouldn't be fair)
Hack, that is assumign su AI devs have unlimited time motivation resources and commitment.
If such a system where created I would nto give consent for NTai or any other AI thatc ame from em to eb allowed to aprticipate. That sort of online system would make thigns worse and encourage the atmosphere already in palce which isnt encouraging friendly comeptition at all, its infact killing off AI's.
You really think 'then AI devs would just make their AI's harder to compete its that simple' is a valid reason?! You really dont duenrstand the amount of work that has gone into AAI/KAI/NTai. Newcoemrs already have a huge mountain to climb if theyw ish to compete with these 3 AI's.
What you propose encourages aggressive competition aimed at monopolistic situations, that demoralises AI devs and crushes newcomers. AI devs will either win and have a monopoly, or get demoralised and give up with nobody to replace them and no newcomers to take up the challenge.
There is a difference between friendly competition and agressive cold hearted comeptition. We want an AI community not an AI cold war, any attempt to encourage such a thinG would ultimately leave the spring community with a problematic AI monopoly where little development is done and the AI dev can do whatever they want regardless of wether he needs to change his AI or not because they ahve the only AI left.
If such a system where created I would nto give consent for NTai or any other AI thatc ame from em to eb allowed to aprticipate. That sort of online system would make thigns worse and encourage the atmosphere already in palce which isnt encouraging friendly comeptition at all, its infact killing off AI's.
You really think 'then AI devs would just make their AI's harder to compete its that simple' is a valid reason?! You really dont duenrstand the amount of work that has gone into AAI/KAI/NTai. Newcoemrs already have a huge mountain to climb if theyw ish to compete with these 3 AI's.
What you propose encourages aggressive competition aimed at monopolistic situations, that demoralises AI devs and crushes newcomers. AI devs will either win and have a monopoly, or get demoralised and give up with nobody to replace them and no newcomers to take up the challenge.
There is a difference between friendly competition and agressive cold hearted comeptition. We want an AI community not an AI cold war, any attempt to encourage such a thinG would ultimately leave the spring community with a problematic AI monopoly where little development is done and the AI dev can do whatever they want regardless of wether he needs to change his AI or not because they ahve the only AI left.
It would be optional, of course. Some people might not want to compete, for whatever reason. For example, I understand that some AIs are intended to compete with humans, not other AIs, so the results of an AI vs AI tournament might not be representative of the actual quality of the work. I should have made that clear.AF wrote:Hack, that is assumign su AI devs have unlimited time motivation resources and commitment.
If such a system where created I would nto give consent for NTai or any other AI thatc ame from em to eb allowed to aprticipate. That sort of online system would make thigns worse and encourage the atmosphere already in palce which isnt encouraging friendly comeptition at all, its infact killing off AI's.
This idea is really just a general extension of the usual open source philosophy, in which code is improved by having many contributors. The difference between this case and archetypal open source projects such as the Linux kernel is that we have a way to measure which code is better: we can run a tournament and see who wins!
I am sure that it is a great deal of work to build an AI from scratch - I have not tried to do this - but if AIs are open source and released under the GPL, then one AI developer can improve on another's work, standing on the shoulders of an existing giant to make something even better. All the developers retain copyright and credit for their work, of course, just like Linux. If the original developer takes an open source AI in a direction that you don't like, you can fork the AI and make your own version.
However, the original developer of an AI is able to opt out of this ecosystem entirely, by not releasing AI source code, or by choosing a restrictive licence for the source... i.e. not GPL.
I think that the results would be very interesting, and could create an open source AI development community with no parallel that I know of. However, perhaps AI development is not amenable to this model, despite the possibility of using tournaments to evaluate AIs against each other. I don't know. If anyone would be interested in competing in such a system, then I encourage them to post below. It's opt-in, not opt-out.