What would you say if.... a non-cheating AI .. well... multiple AI's are added to the game in the "background" with an option to turn them on/off by a command by the server like .ai_on .ai_off or something simmilar...
and the AI's have no army, no anything, but run a .take script when they get a "player bla bla bla has left" message in the console... and take his place...
what this would do?
when a player leaves the game, the AI .take's his army, knows the allies, etc... and continues the fight in his place to the best of its ability... giving the remaining players or player the ability to finish out the fight to utter victory...
what it would require?
1- a stable, non-cheating, somewhat hard to beat AI.
maybe you guys wanna add that option to the AI so that it will auto .take an absent player and give people more fight in games, or at least get more playtesting by people...
just a thought...
Idea with AI
Moderators: hoijui, Moderators
AF, he's talking about taking over player when player leaves.
Maybe it's AI-wise not possible but obviously it is engine wise possible. The engine could, if a special option is set, load a GlobalAI for the player and issue a unitidle command or whatever is needed to start the AI. There's not even a need for a .take.
Anyway, in the end it just comes down to "someone make us a patch"
Maybe it's AI-wise not possible but obviously it is engine wise possible. The engine could, if a special option is set, load a GlobalAI for the player and issue a unitidle command or whatever is needed to start the AI. There's not even a need for a .take.
Anyway, in the end it just comes down to "someone make us a patch"
I knew that tobi, and I agre it'd have to be an engine side thing.
However because of the way things work simply assigning the AI at the right time wouldnt work. Youd need to add a call for every unit the player had that has unitcreated() untifinished() unitidle() else AI's would simply freeze up untill an army came walking into their abse and started pushing the conbots...
However because of the way things work simply assigning the AI at the right time wouldnt work. Youd need to add a call for every unit the player had that has unitcreated() untifinished() unitidle() else AI's would simply freeze up untill an army came walking into their abse and started pushing the conbots...
-
LathanStanley
- Posts: 1429
- Joined: 20 Jun 2005, 05:16
There is nothing blocking the engine patch from ALSO informing the AI it has gained new units to allow it to start using them (unitcreated could work for this - though it is of course a hack). The only thing required should be a modification to the engine to allow the host to set AIs for players that will take over when they leave. I'm sure people will also try to modify their AI's to compensate with the unusual circumstances of gaining 100+ units at once...
an alternative solution to people leaving (forgive me if it does this already, I play exclusively against AI so it's not an issue).
Something I've picked up to custom maps on warcraft3. When a player leaves, simply distribute their units (including structures) randomly between the other players - I think most people would prefer to acquire half a base for free than get a new ally who is really dead weight and end up being 'chained to a corpse'.
AI's are still not up to scratch with the best players, and assuming no cheating AI's probably never will be. Fact is, a computer isn't as intelligent as a person.
Not really an AI development point, of course. I'm not trying to say you guys aren't doing good work by the way, I have ever confidence that you'll develop AI's that could kick me all over the map, it's just they won't be able to keep up with a human who is equally 'click perfect'
-Gurkha
Something I've picked up to custom maps on warcraft3. When a player leaves, simply distribute their units (including structures) randomly between the other players - I think most people would prefer to acquire half a base for free than get a new ally who is really dead weight and end up being 'chained to a corpse'.
AI's are still not up to scratch with the best players, and assuming no cheating AI's probably never will be. Fact is, a computer isn't as intelligent as a person.
Not really an AI development point, of course. I'm not trying to say you guys aren't doing good work by the way, I have ever confidence that you'll develop AI's that could kick me all over the map, it's just they won't be able to keep up with a human who is equally 'click perfect'
-Gurkha
More often than not, a person leaving HAS an ally already; their stuff is taken by their remaining allies all at once. Unfortunately for the receiver, this spreads their attention out along a (typically) larger area and gives one less mind opposing the enemy. The idea with these AIs is to help in situations (that I've seen quite frequently), where the surviving allies simply don't want to take over the base since they already have enough shit to mess with - they also don't want it doing nothing though. A dirt poor AI could still be reasonable if it were sharing resources at that stage...
And, for the record, I think the best AIs will beat the best humans - someday. Humans simply can't micromanage every single unit in the 500 unit swarm, fine tune their resource usage to avoid over/under usage, and conduct constant offense on multiple fronts at the same time. These are partly due to physical interface limitations (can only move the camera so fast and can't order units offscreen to build something also offscreen, for example).
And, for the record, I think the best AIs will beat the best humans - someday. Humans simply can't micromanage every single unit in the 500 unit swarm, fine tune their resource usage to avoid over/under usage, and conduct constant offense on multiple fronts at the same time. These are partly due to physical interface limitations (can only move the camera so fast and can't order units offscreen to build something also offscreen, for example).