AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Please post here for questions and discussion about scenario design and the game editor for WITP.

Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

Post Reply
donnie_1974_texas
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 4:42 pm

AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by donnie_1974_texas »

An interesting question...I have been seeing some comments that seem to indicate War Plan Orange may be very closely the same model as WITP but with likely less hard coded elements controlling the AI responses.

Is it possible, in general, that we are modding the wrong game? That perhaps we should be modding WPO?

I do not own WPO so I am unsure of what changes in the game engine were made, if any.
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by Terminus »

The AI in WPO is, if this is even possible, a bit weaker...

Oh, and WPO isn't moddable to the end of WWII. I believe it can't be modded beyond 1940.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Mifune
Posts: 794
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Florida

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by Mifune »

Also from what I read WPO does not have radar.
Perennial Remedial Student of the Mike Solli School of Economics. One day I might graduate.
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by Terminus »

Correct (for obvious reasons). All radar effects were edited out...
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Mike Wood
Posts: 1424
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Oakland, California
Contact:

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by Mike Wood »

The author of WPO used the WIP campaign editor and rewrote the AI. Many mod and scenario authors forget that they can do this and used the hard coded AI set for the main WIP campaign.

Michael Wood
ORIGINAL: donnie_1974_texas

An interesting question...I have been seeing some comments that seem to indicate War Plan Orange may be very closely the same model as WITP but with likely less hard coded elements controlling the AI responses.

Is it possible, in general, that we are modding the wrong game? That perhaps we should be modding WPO?

I do not own WPO so I am unsure of what changes in the game engine were made, if any.
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by Terminus »

Don't think they forget, I think they're intimidated by it. I know I am...
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
el cid again
Posts: 16980
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by el cid again »

me too
User avatar
hueglin
Posts: 297
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 2:03 pm
Location: Kingston, ON, Canada

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by hueglin »

ORIGINAL: Mike Wood

The author of WPO used the WIP campaign editor and rewrote the AI. Many mod and scenario authors forget that they can do this and used the hard coded AI set for the main WIP campaign.

Michael Wood
ORIGINAL: donnie_1974_texas

An interesting question...I have been seeing some comments that seem to indicate War Plan Orange may be very closely the same model as WITP but with likely less hard coded elements controlling the AI responses.

Is it possible, in general, that we are modding the wrong game? That perhaps we should be modding WPO?

I do not own WPO so I am unsure of what changes in the game engine were made, if any.


Where is the WIP campaign editor? Is it a part of the scenario editor?
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by Terminus »

Yes... There's a series of buttons for manipulating the different AI modules. I remember Tankerace have a HORRIBLE time beating on them...
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6395
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by JeffroK »

I think the AI in WPO & WITP are similar, both are acceptable in the smaller scenarios and early in the campaigns. I've had funny things happen in WPO as I have in WITP.
 
Breaking the back of this, would make WITP an excellent game for the vast number of solo players.
 
An aid may be to compress/delete/combine the number of units and bases, I think AI gets flustered easily and given too many options, fails. (But in Oct 43, scen 155, I left Jesselton ungarrisoned, the troops were on a slow convoy[:)], and the Jap AI recaptured it.) Play to its script and it works, the problem is how to improve its script.
 
As I've mentioned, Drongo did an excellent scenario where the AI got aggressive. He deleted a lot of smaller bases and forced the Allies into a more set channel. This allowed the AI to react better and made it a harder task for the Allies.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
Buck Beach
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Upland,CA,USA

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by Buck Beach »

ORIGINAL: JeffK
An aid may be to compress/delete/combine the number of units and bases, I think AI gets flustered easily and given too many options, fails. (But in Oct 43, scen 155, I left Jesselton ungarrisoned, the troops were on a slow convoy[:)], and the Jap AI recaptured it.) Play to its script and it works, the problem is how to improve its script.

As I've mentioned, Drongo did an excellent scenario where the AI got aggressive. He deleted a lot of smaller bases and forced the Allies into a more set channel. This allowed the AI to react better and made it a harder task for the Allies.

While this sounds very logical, making it smaller would destroy much of the detail and complexity that really make the game what it is (IMHO). I'm not very optimistic but would hope some sort of code and or script stimulus to get the AI react better would eventually be a reality. Ideally, from a very layman's point of view. I would like to see the AI respond much like in the game Civilization IV (w/o the SigInt cheating by the computer). However, I am not so dumb to see that WITP is significantly more complex in its options than Civ IV and this is an over simplification of the issue.

I can hope can't I.
el cid again
Posts: 16980
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by el cid again »

ORIGINAL: JeffK

I think the AI in WPO & WITP are similar, both are acceptable in the smaller scenarios and early in the campaigns. I've had funny things happen in WPO as I have in WITP.

Breaking the back of this, would make WITP an excellent game for the vast number of solo players.

An aid may be to compress/delete/combine the number of units and bases, I think AI gets flustered easily and given too many options, fails. (But in Oct 43, scen 155, I left Jesselton ungarrisoned, the troops were on a slow convoy[:)], and the Jap AI recaptured it.) Play to its script and it works, the problem is how to improve its script.

As I've mentioned, Drongo did an excellent scenario where the AI got aggressive. He deleted a lot of smaller bases and forced the Allies into a more set channel. This allowed the AI to react better and made it a harder task for the Allies.

I think more bases HELP the AI. For example, it retreats better. Economically, a stupid AI has more to lose - so more = better that way too.
Buck Beach
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Upland,CA,USA

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by Buck Beach »

ORIGINAL: el cid again
ORIGINAL: JeffK

I think the AI in WPO & WITP are similar, both are acceptable in the smaller scenarios and early in the campaigns. I've had funny things happen in WPO as I have in WITP.

Breaking the back of this, would make WITP an excellent game for the vast number of solo players.

An aid may be to compress/delete/combine the number of units and bases, I think AI gets flustered easily and given too many options, fails. (But in Oct 43, scen 155, I left Jesselton ungarrisoned, the troops were on a slow convoy[:)], and the Jap AI recaptured it.) Play to its script and it works, the problem is how to improve its script.

As I've mentioned, Drongo did an excellent scenario where the AI got aggressive. He deleted a lot of smaller bases and forced the Allies into a more set channel. This allowed the AI to react better and made it a harder task for the Allies.

I think more bases HELP the AI. For example, it retreats better. Economically, a stupid AI has more to lose - so more = better that way too.


I hear you Sid, but isn't it the limited number of options or responses in a computer chess game that enables the computer to play the game so well. This may be a apples and oranges comparison, but does seem logical.
User avatar
kokubokan25
Posts: 1252
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 8:43 pm
Location: Iliaca, Spain

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by kokubokan25 »

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Don't think they forget, I think they're intimidated by it. I know I am...

Good point! I'm not intimidated, i don't know how to do it. It's a different thing.
Image
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6395
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by JeffroK »

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

ORIGINAL: JeffK
An aid may be to compress/delete/combine the number of units and bases, I think AI gets flustered easily and given too many options, fails. (But in Oct 43, scen 155, I left Jesselton ungarrisoned, the troops were on a slow convoy[:)], and the Jap AI recaptured it.) Play to its script and it works, the problem is how to improve its script.

As I've mentioned, Drongo did an excellent scenario where the AI got aggressive. He deleted a lot of smaller bases and forced the Allies into a more set channel. This allowed the AI to react better and made it a harder task for the Allies.

While this sounds very logical, making it smaller would destroy much of the detail and complexity that really make the game what it is (IMHO). I'm not very optimistic but would hope some sort of code and or script stimulus to get the AI react better would eventually be a reality. Ideally, from a very layman's point of view. I would like to see the AI respond much like in the game Civilization IV (w/o the SigInt cheating by the computer). However, I am not so dumb to see that WITP is significantly more complex in its options than Civ IV and this is an over simplification of the issue.

I can hope can't I.

Fair enough, when playing PBEM.

But having too many "beach" spots allows the Human player to land at places the AI will not consider defending, taking these away forces the Human to attack the key targets and also allows the AI to defend them.

A major change to the AI would be to stop it from amassing hundreds of ships in ports too close to enemy LBA, seems to do it for both sides. Would this be because the ships are allocated to a higher command that in turn, sets up too close to the front??

IMHO, fixing the AI will take the game to an even higher level.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
el cid again
Posts: 16980
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm

RE: AI...Are we modding the wrong game?

Post by el cid again »

ORIGINAL: JeffK

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

ORIGINAL: JeffK
An aid may be to compress/delete/combine the number of units and bases, I think AI gets flustered easily and given too many options, fails. (But in Oct 43, scen 155, I left Jesselton ungarrisoned, the troops were on a slow convoy[:)], and the Jap AI recaptured it.) Play to its script and it works, the problem is how to improve its script.

As I've mentioned, Drongo did an excellent scenario where the AI got aggressive. He deleted a lot of smaller bases and forced the Allies into a more set channel. This allowed the AI to react better and made it a harder task for the Allies.

While this sounds very logical, making it smaller would destroy much of the detail and complexity that really make the game what it is (IMHO). I'm not very optimistic but would hope some sort of code and or script stimulus to get the AI react better would eventually be a reality. Ideally, from a very layman's point of view. I would like to see the AI respond much like in the game Civilization IV (w/o the SigInt cheating by the computer). However, I am not so dumb to see that WITP is significantly more complex in its options than Civ IV and this is an over simplification of the issue.

I can hope can't I.

Fair enough, when playing PBEM.

But having too many "beach" spots allows the Human player to land at places the AI will not consider defending, taking these away forces the Human to attack the key targets and also allows the AI to defend them.

A major change to the AI would be to stop it from amassing hundreds of ships in ports too close to enemy LBA, seems to do it for both sides. Would this be because the ships are allocated to a higher command that in turn, sets up too close to the front??

IMHO, fixing the AI will take the game to an even higher level.

The problem you can land at many points is the reality. You cannot defend them all and be strong everywhere. NOT to have the beaches is poor simulation of this reality IMHO. IF I had more slots you would see EVERY beach of value to a major landing force. The AI is right to focus defense on major points IMHO as well. That is not a problem as far as I am concerned.

We do not know how AI controls ships? But for LAND and AIR units, it allocates to LOWER HQ than we can. I think the ship AI routines are way too simple to work well - and do not recommend letting AI control them - even in a "computer controlled" game. You need to aid the AI or MOST of your shipping will be wasted and then lost.

This thread is about modding to aid the AI. We are strictly limited in that regard. And there is probably not a high demand to fix the code. It is a hard thing to do this - and not very visible - not "chrome" but the "guts" as it were. Hard = time consuming = expensive to do. Not done by modders = not done for free either.
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design”