AI

[lgsptlnd]

As a long time fan of the Talonsoft games and one who most often plays against the A.I., I've suspected that it's in the code, that the A.I. is "informed" that a certain percentage of their units are targeted by indirect fire and conversely that some human player units are "revealed" to the A.I.s' indirect fire. Does anyone know if I'm correct in that assumption?

[jreebel]

I've always suspected it.

[osiris_slith]

HI
 
The AI has issues that have been known for a long time but in the world of Matrix there is nothing wrong with the AI. Over the past year or so more than a few individuals have made very reasonable suggestions for AI improvement etc and not much has happened. That being said I cant really blame them for not wanting to fix the AI because lets face it this game is old. As many mods and patches you want to throw at it the bottom line is this game is ancient in the world of gaming and the game engine is rusty along with the AI which suffers from some kind amnesia. 
 
Rene

[33sherman]

In lieu of an improved AI, a nice feature would be the ability to double or triple the amount of Computer player's units in randomly-generated battles & DCGs.

[kool_kat]

ORIGINAL: osiris

HI

The AI has issues that have been known for a long time but in the world of Matrix there is nothing wrong with the AI. Over the past year or so more than a few individuals have made very reasonable suggestions for AI improvement etc and not much has happened. That being said I cant really blame them for not wanting to fix the AI because lets face it this game is old. As many mods and patches you want to throw at it the bottom line is this game is ancient in the world of gaming and the game engine is rusty along with the AI which suffers from some kind amnesia. 

Rene

IMO, if you are only playing against the AI... you have not seen 1/10th of how this game can perform. CS really (and only shines) with human versus human play.

I gave up playing against the AI years ago (too easy to beat HAL)... and only play against human opponents.

[rich12545]

ORIGINAL: mwest

ORIGINAL: osiris

HI

The AI has issues that have been known for a long time but in the world of Matrix there is nothing wrong with the AI. Over the past year or so more than a few individuals have made very reasonable suggestions for AI improvement etc and not much has happened. That being said I cant really blame them for not wanting to fix the AI because lets face it this game is old. As many mods and patches you want to throw at it the bottom line is this game is ancient in the world of gaming and the game engine is rusty along with the AI which suffers from some kind amnesia. 

Rene

IMO, if you are only playing against the AI... you have not seen 1/10th of how this game can perform. CS really (and only shines) with human versus human play.

I gave up playing against the AI years ago (too easy to beat HAL)... and only play against human opponents.

Well, the game isn't being sold as a h2h game only. If it's being sold with an ai, most people including me will play against Hal exclusively. That's the way it is. My understanding is that after Modern Games 1 comes out, maybe in 2011 or 2012 the way it's going, the ai will be worked on.

[Jason Petho]

ORIGINAL: rich12545

My understanding is that after Modern Games 1 comes out, maybe in 2011 or 2012 the way it's going, the ai will be worked on.

That is correct, HAL will be worked on after the initial release of Modern Wars: Volume I.

Which is getting closer. Just finished building a Linked Campaign Game for the Middle East portion. Good times!

Jason Petho

[V22 Osprey]

Can we have modern wars out by August 2010?

[Jason Petho]

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

Can we have modern wars out by August 2010?

I'm hoping, yes... I have a baby coming in October and won't have the vast amount of time I dedicate to the Modern Wars as I do now.

So yes, before September!

Jason Petho

[1925frank]

Congratulations, Jason!  And to your wife too, who probably deserves a little credit.

[kool_kat]

ORIGINAL: rich12545

Well, the game isn't being sold as a h2h game only. If it's being sold with an ai, most people including me will play against Hal exclusively. That's the way it is. My understanding is that after Modern Games 1 comes out, maybe in 2011 or 2012 the way it's going, the ai will be worked on.

Yes, I understand. But during the 1-2 years+ before HAL gets a "brain transplant" ... why not try H2H play? When I first was introduced to CS... I played the AI exclusively. I got pretty good at tactics... or so I thought until I tried my first H2H play! [X(] I got "killed" by my human opponent. Moves and tactics that worked wonderfully against the AI failed miserably against a "live" opponent. Playing against a human opponent, I had to "unlearn" nearly everything that worked well when playing against the AI.

So, I urge you and other players to at least give H2H play a try. I think it will really expand your game playing horizons! [8D]

But, in the end, players are free to play CS as they like - either against the AI or H2H. That's the beauty of it. [:)]

[Miamieagle]

Be careful what you ask for!

It might be just what you get!

In my opinion the Ai just needs a few adjustments not a complete overhaul.

It could become unbeatetable and thus unplayable!

I hope the new Ai upgrade will be optional!

[Miamieagle]

By the way Congratulation!

[osiris_slith]

HI

The game is not marketed as H2H player game and I would say a good portion of players would just like to kick back in the evening and play a few turns against the AI since most of us have jobs and so on. Also because u dont have to wait 2 days or 2 weeks for a bloody turn to be done by the inefficient human player..there is no fun playing 1 turn a day..its boring..I wanna win or lose in the same evening is my preference...I wont dispute that playing against a live player is much more challenging and on occasion I do..but it takes way too much time. Even direct internet play u still need time to play it at least 1-2 hours..to get a small game in.

Rene

[kool_kat]

ORIGINAL: osiris

HI

The game is not marketed as H2H player game and I would say a good portion of players would just like to kick back in the evening and play a few turns against the AI since most of us have jobs and so on. Also because u dont have to wait 2 days or 2 weeks for a bloody turn to be done by the inefficient human player..there is no fun playing 1 turn a day..its boring..I wanna win or lose in the same evening is my preference...I wont dispute that playing against a live player is much more challenging and on occasion I do..but it takes way too much time. Even direct internet play u still need time to play it at least 1-2 hours..to get a small game in.

Rene

I understand your points. But who says you have to have only one H2H game underway at a time? [&:]

Most players I know, who play H2H exclusively, have several games underway at a time. This way... a player can almost be guaranteed there is a game turn (or multiple ones) waiting in your email inbox when you get home from work.

I agree with the time committement for PBeM. If you are looking for instant gratification... PBeM is not for you.

But, to each his own? [8D]

[berto]

ORIGINAL: mwest
I understand your points. But who says you have to have only one H2H game underway at a time? [&:]

Most players I know, who play H2H exclusively, have several games underway at a time. This way... a player can almost be guaranteed there is a game turn (or multiple ones) waiting in your email inbox when you get home from work.

I agree with the time committement for PBeM. If you are looking for instant gratification... PBeM is not for you.

But, to each his own? [8D]

I like watching a 2-3 hour full-length feature film more than watching a sequence of 1/2 to 1 hour TV shows over the course of an evening.

I prefer concerti and symphonies to the 3-minutes-per-song hit parade on pop radio.

I enjoy a good book better than a good magazine.

And I favor an evening or a weekend playing a single game with unbroken, continuous narrative to bits and pieces of PBEM games in fits and starts.

"Instant gratification"? Whatever.

Yup, to each his own. [8D]

[kool_kat]

ORIGINAL: berto
Yup, to each his own. [8D]

Yep. That's the beauty of CS... players can enjoy it in their own ways... whether playing H2H or against the AI. [8D]

Play on?

[MrRoadrunner]

I would hope that if some want a tougher AI they would turn extreme assault on and also modify the scenario so that the AI's HQ's would not flit about the map in search of a reason to die. [;)]

Asking the rest of us to suffer through a senseless upgrade that may actually hurt the game is a bit much? [8|]

RR

[TAIL GUNNER]

A simple AI fix would be to include a clever 'if-then' statement that would negate the senseless firing onto a target hex that has zero chance of damage...

"Attack = 1"
"Defense = 7"


"No Effect"
[8|]

[Huib]

One of the main reasons HAL seems so stupid is because a lot of the existing scenarios designed for play vs Computer are weak designs. It seems the old designers did not have enough experience as "players" to judge when a scn is a challenge and when it is too easy. Not having EA also did not help. Who could foresee back then that the game would by hijacked by a gamey surround, disrupt, assault trick. No HAL would ever have an answer on such exploitation.

There is really a lot to be won there.

I just finished designing an LCG for Modern Wars and I'm sure even veteran players will have to work hard to be succesful in that one.
In fact in some of the scenarios I lost more sp than HAL did! Over the last year I lost more games to HAL than to human opponents...

Huib