Omnimaga
General Discussion => Technology and Development => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: Zera on February 12, 2010, 04:49:30 pm
-
First and foremost, this is something of a rant.
When you're playing computerized versions of tabletop games or puzzles, you usually have the option of playing against a computer opponent. Admittedly, some A.I. will have the advantage of knowing the most underhanded strategies to win; but as long as these strategies are legitimate plays, I wouldn't necessarily complain about the difficulty. When the A.I. blatantly cheats or breaks the fundamental mechanics of the game, then I have an issue with the game itself.
I recently downloaded a computerized version of Hnefatafl. Since I doubt many people are familiar with the game, the objective and play is fairly simple: You begin by playing either the attacking or defending side of two armies. If you're playing the defending side, then your objective is to move your king to any of the four corners to safely escape to board. If you're playing the attacking side, your objective is to capture the other army's king. Pieces can move any number of spaces in a straight line, provided their path is not obstructed. An enemy piece is captured by sandwiching it between two of your own pieces, but the king may only be captured by surrounding it from all ends. At the end of the first match, you switch sides and play the opposing army. The outcome is determined by who won both matches, or if there's a draw, who made the most captures overall.
Now, in this version, you sometimes have to play multiple games against the same NPC. In particular, there is one NPC who requires you to play three whole games. (six matches total) Should you lose even one of these games, the NPC automatically wins. Even if you have two flawless victories and lose the third game, the NPC still wins. The first two games are fairly simple. After that, the NPC blatantly breaks the game mechanics by "summoning the power of the Norse gods." This effect *destroys* a piece from your army -- usually a piece that you've strategically placed to prevent the NPC from winning. Right at the end of the match, he will successfully destroy any piece you use in attempt to obstruct the escape route of his king; thus, even if you won the last two games, you lose the entire campaign.
These kind of abilities were never present in the actual Hnefatafl board game. They, infact, undermine the entire element of strategy. No matter how you arrange your pieces, the NPC can destroy them at its own discretion. It's like if you were playing a board game with someone in-person, and they just started removing your pieces from the board because they wanted to. Would you even bother to play against them? No. I don't think so. So why do some game developers think that this kind of slap-in-the-face approach to implementing difficulty is going to work in a computerized version of the game? :P
For reference, this is a Hnefatafl setup:
(http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/340/setupz.png)
-
That does sound completely stupid that such a ability would be allowed :-X
The game(although I have no idea why) kinda reminds me of the game of Go, I guess just because of the way pieces are captured XD
-
I feel ya, mate.
Though, I hate the underhanded strategies too. (YEs, even the one's that are legal moves in game.)
However, I've learned something from your topic...
I learned that I want to play Hnefatafl. Really badly.
So...
Thank you. =)
-
lol i really want to play Hnefatafl too. haha great name that I cannot pronounce
But the game does seem to be really fun o.o
I love those kind of games
-
Zera, when you get the chance, can you type out how to pronounce that?
I've tried like 40 things in my head and nothing's coming out right.
-
I'm thinking H is silent, so it's like, Nefatafatle?
idk -_-;;;
-
Bad AI!!! Go play by the rules! :P
Sounds like a fun game! I also would like to play this. ;D
-
Neh-pah-tah-pull
If it helps, English would probably spell it more like "Nepataple." You can just call it "King's Table," since that is a common translation.
-
I hear you Zera. This happens a lot in Starcraft. In Starcraft, when you send units to an expansion base, the computer will know it. The computer will also often build in function of what you build, so if you fill your base with cannons, prepares to be sieged by tanks with longer range attacks.
In some RPGs, some enemies or bosses also seems to read your mind. If you revive dead characters, the boss will kill them again afterward. If you attempt restoring HP to a low HP char, the boss will attack first and attempt to kill the character afterward. I also noticed that certain mini-games included in games manipulates luck. In Star Ocean The Second Story, when you do the bunny races and Bunny Shoes is one of the prizes, save state on the emulator and try choosing another prize to bet on. The Bunny shoes prize bunny will win! Then reload your state (which resets the random seed to right when you saved state) and select the bunny shoes prize. You'll lose!
-
Pshhh lazy programmers :P they couldn't program a good enough AI so they had to cheat! Well at least I am now interested in this game :) (and it's pronunciation XD)
-
I hear you Zera. This happens a lot in Starcraft. In Starcraft, when you send units to an expansion base, the computer will know it. The computer will also often build in function of what you build, so if you fill your base with cannons, prepares to be sieged by tanks with longer range attacks.
Forget that. Any time you fight against a CPU, they rush you before you can even build any structures. :P
When a friend introduced me to the game, we always had a 50/50 win / lose ratio with CPU players, because they rushed weaker units into our bases before we had time to build anything. I always had to go the route of immediately building canons around both our bases to deal with the units, or canon-rush the CPU bases and end the match within a couple of minutes.
-
actually not all the time. If you build some defense or weak units early sometimes you're safe from early rushes. Sometimes the comp won't even rush in my case. I notice when you build no denfense or units they tend to know and attack, though x.x
-
I notice when you build no denfense or units they tend to know and attack, though x.x
Maybe that's why they keep rushing me. I try not to waste any time with weaker units. I try to go straight for upgrades and advanced structures. I had never considered the possibility that the A.I. would somehow know what I was up to, and adjust its strategy dynamically.
My usual strategy (since I play Protoss) is to go straight for a mass production of dragoons and rush them into enemy bases. Most games, I have to fortify my own base with at least a few canons to prevent early rushing. If I'm feeling particularly vengeful, I move my drones straight into the enemy bases and build canons there. :P
-
yeah in RTSes it's always a bad idea to tech up without defending, else often you get attacked when not ready. I always try to keep a few defense in case an eraly attack occurs, then build some units to help the defense. Upgrades can wait a bit, altough they eventually become essential.
-
While playing against computer I always feared cheating...
I like the idea of the board game! I am going to play it... I enjoy table games and I was looking something new like that one.
About A.I.
There are some RTS that the computer gets extra resources outcome to have advantage.
Some AI only attack you if they have more points/army than you. Coward AI... Even in fog playing. :P
-
cheating AI is annoying..
it really bothers me with empire earth. it's just not funny
-
I wonder if in SC2 AI still knows where's your base automatically... so far the probe seems to scout random places but I wasn't sure. Another thing I wonder is if Insane computer AI is cheated? We tried 6-pooling a computer in insane mode in 2v1 and he could immediately defend against the rush with his zealots. My teamate is in Diamond league... to me it seems like they have slightly faster build times or simply press keys in an instant, in a way that is normally impossible by humans...
In RPGs, I think there was a RPG that knew what you were gonna use as attacks, but I forgot which. Immediately before a white mage casted Life to revive a party member, the boss would immediately try to kill the white mage. Some sort of mind reading
-
Well I can see why programmers/game-devs sometimes want to cheat, it's dead easy to do so. This because in a RTS for example all the information about you is stored somewhere, the AI just accesses it and takes some peeks as to where you base is and which units you have (so which it should take to counter) so those are pretty easy things. If an AI had to find a base all by itself it would increase the AI's complexity and make it more prone to mistakes. You can try to develop a super-duper find-base algorithm for the AI but none of these algorithms are watertight. Simply look at the A* pathfinding system. In supreme commander when moving two groups of units trough each other they would stuck halfway through and they wouldn't come out neatly:
However this new 'Flowfield' isn't flawless either, not that it cheats but the units don't keep formation after having marched trough another group of units.
Anyways for games like the one you mentioned zera cheating AI is annoying but for bigger RTS's or maybe even shooters it might be neccessary to cut down production time, game size and complexity allowing it to run faster (maybe). Long story short, I can see the advantages of a cheating AI altough I don't think it should be made that obvious that the AI cheats...
-
Yeah and I think it needs to not be made too unfair, like an hard mode that even an expert can beat.
-
Neh-pah-tah-pull
If it helps, English would probably spell it more like "Nepataple." You can just call it "King's Table," since that is a common translation.
On what syllable does the accent fall?
-
Unfortunately since he's gone from here you may not get an answer fast on that one (unless someone else knows) :(
-
zera, couldn't you easily draw a stalemate as a defender by placing 4 of your pieces in the four corners?
-
As said in my previous post Zera no longer frequents Omnimaga, so he won't respond here. You would need to ask him on Cemetech instead.
-
When AI cheats is an interesting topic. How about making another topic discussing "When AI is stupid"? I thought of this because I played a sc game recently where my cpu could have easily wiped out all 3 opponents single-handedly, but instead, I had to build up to DTs and kill two of them after i got rushed before the cpu would do anything.... which was kill off the remainder of the base of the guy who had already left.
-
I like the chess game from Windows Entertainment Pack. It has a couple of very, um, creative ways of avoiding a loss:
Method 1: Cause a General Protection Fault.
Method 2: Just arbitrarily remove your opponent's pieces from the board, or switch them for a piece of your own color! In this game, I used to have a queen and rook (as you can see from the move list), but apparently my rook has gone AWOL (along with my king) and my queen has turned traitor.
-
It really bugs me when the AI does something impossible for normal players, like shooting a rifle across a map, through foliage, over a mountain, and still manages a head shot...
It's then that I get annoyed and pull out the God mode.
-
I wonder if in SC2 AI still knows where's your base automatically... so far the probe seems to scout random places but I wasn't sure. Another thing I wonder is if Insane computer AI is cheated? We tried 6-pooling a computer in insane mode in 2v1 and he could immediately defend against the rush with his zealots. My teamate is in Diamond league... to me it seems like they have slightly faster build times or simply press keys in an instant, in a way that is normally impossible by humans...
The SC2 Insane AI cheats; the developers said so themselves. However no other AI difficulty in SC2 cheats.
In SC1, AI has perfect vision, knows presence of cloaked units (but can't attack them unless they have a detector), and starts off with 1000 minerals and vespene. Really, the main reason why the AI is still quite beatable is that its unit control is terrible.
-
When AI cheats is an interesting topic. How about making another topic discussing "When AI is stupid"? I thought of this because I played a sc game recently where my cpu could have easily wiped out all 3 opponents single-handedly, but instead, I had to build up to DTs and kill two of them after i got rushed before the cpu would do anything.... which was kill off the remainder of the base of the guy who had already left.
Haha yeah in SC CPUs are stupid sometimes, especially SC1, when you wall your base with barracks and supply depots and put bunkers behind. This is why a good player can solo 7 computers in a FFA. On top of that, sometimes the first 3 pushes are just basic units. Another weird thing is when you send a drone to attack their workers and they start following you. By microing your worker around their base you can really hurt their economy. I wonder if in SC2 AI still knows where's your base automatically... so far the probe seems to scout random places but I wasn't sure. Another thing I wonder is if Insane computer AI is cheated? We tried 6-pooling a computer in insane mode in 2v1 and he could immediately defend against the rush with his zealots. My teamate is in Diamond league... to me it seems like they have slightly faster build times or simply press keys in an instant, in a way that is normally impossible by humans...
The SC2 Insane AI cheats; the developers said so themselves. However no other AI difficulty in SC2 cheats.
In SC1, AI has perfect vision, knows presence of cloaked units (but can't attack them unless they have a detector), and starts off with 1000 minerals and vespene. Really, the main reason why the AI is still quite beatable is that its unit control is terrible.
Yeah I heard they got more minerals or got them faster and/or started with more, although I would need to check replays. Maybe stuff just builds slightly faster. I knew in SC1 the AI knew where your base were, but I didn't know they started with that many minerals.
That said, I am sure if someone made a RTS for calcs with many separate units being controlled at once they would need to make the AI cheat, though.
Another example of bad AI is in Warcraft 2 on complex maps. Units will not go through pathways that goes in multiple directions, you'll have to direct them over and over.
On-calc I am sure for unit orders there would need to be a limit on action stacking. For example, if you give orders to 4 different groups of units, the 4th group's order would overwrite the first's and then the first one would stop moving.