I'm confused. Is the person that posts under the name "Coregames" a developer for computer WiF or is he a potential customer like the rest of us?
Well I guess that's the 64,000 dollar question.
Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets
I'm confused. Is the person that posts under the name "Coregames" a developer for computer WiF or is he a potential customer like the rest of us?
ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
There was a reference to the AI software for chess programs and its decision tree approach. In case you aren't aware, WiF is a much more complex game that chess. There are more pieces. There are more unit types. The playing surface is larger. Instead of moving one piece per turn you move dozens. Combat is probabilistic not deterministic. The terrain is diverse and changes with the season. Need I go on?
Operational plans would require the development of a special language. The language, at a minimum would list objectives, a time table, a maximum level of troops commitment.
Strong chess programs are increasingly dependent on positional parameters, still relying on brute-force look-ahead to see many variations to a great depth, but having a better idea of how to evaluate the position at the termination of each branch of their search. To play well, MWiF will need to have a strong meta-strategy component...
Bear in mind that the thoughts I am puttng forth here are only 10 or 20 seconds old and they may not age gracefully. I write them in the spirit of "ideas for the AI in CWiF". My ideas haven't been alive long enough for me to grow attached to them. If they provoke a thought or two in the reader, then I would be happy
ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey
But alas, my ideas...your ideas...are like the fleeting thoughts Shannon has described, put forth with no assemblage into a vast cauldron of bubbling thought. Eventually there will be so many that the soup will mask all the characteristics of the added herbs and so will have no distinct flavor, and we will have to rehash them all again.
My time is better served playing WaW, HttR or perhaps and old scenario of SC.
ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey
...There are many unanswered questions and so far I have only heard ambiguous responses ...
RE: My POV - 5/19/2005 9:45:06 PM
Erik Rutins
Administrator
Posts: 4640
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: online This project is not vaporware. We also did not promise an update after E3, but after Origins, so you can expect to hear something by mid-July. We will be meeting in person with Rob Crandall at that point and going over the release plans. Until that time, all I can say is it's not vaporware, we are not trying to keep it from the community and these forums most certainly exist for two-way communications.
Regards,
- Erik
_____________________________
Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development and Business Relations
ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey
Either it will be phased/impulse player interactions as I understand the board game to possess(not sure of the beta WiF) or it will be programmed optionally selective AI interaction for the nonphasing player.
When it comes to playing by email or TCP/IP, the game would have to be modified somewhat to streamline it a bit.
ORIGINAL: coregames
Many of us agree with you about retaining authenticity in MWiF. The debate for months has revolved around that very issue (PBEM vs. faithful adaptation). I am curious: what is your feeling about the other (long-quiet) debate? I'm referring to unified scale vs. variable scale. At first, I lobbied for Matrix to include the option of playing the game as a direct port of the board game. Obviously, strictly computer players would want the unified scale, but the game becomes a much better training tool for the board game if the variable scale is retained. I have long since given that debate up, preferring to rally behind the synchronous play banner (gotta pick your fights).
By the way, most of the issues you talked about had been resolved in Chris's version. It's not perfect, but still farther along than when you last checked it, based on your post. I haven't made it out of 1940 yet, but Patrice DeForno says he has finished a Global War scenario.
* (Gygax and Arneson as Jagger and Richards?)
ORIGINAL: StrictlyRockers
I am serious; if I see a working model of this game with a working AI I will give you one of these [&o] and also mail each designer a personal check as a reward for doing this. I don't think it can be done. I am hopeful, but not expectant.