Jump to content

MoLAoS

Community Members
  • Posts

    135
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by MoLAoS

  1. Someone should look into making a quality utility with maybe a high strategic level planner. For an RTS this should produce the most effective AI.
  2. One file of your code is formatted badly but the rest looks pretty typical I guess. I don't know specifically what various functions do but based on the name you can sort of guess.
  3. Random google grab for behavior tree or BT, I checked to make sure its decent: http://www.altdevblo...behavior-trees/ Rule based AI is the probably the most intuitive. The original Glest uses a rule based system. Basically it has general directives like gather resources and produce units and then it has other things like when you have this, this is the finite state machine part, then do this. That might mean, when the game is 5 minutes in, and you have 10 units, send them to scout the enemy base. This system tends to rely on the game knowing where your base is as well as likely expansions. So the scout part is basically hard coded to go to your starter base while checking any expansions in between. The AI is given specific rules, hence the name. Rule based is sort of like planner iirc. I believe that 0 A.D. is set up for a rule based or hierarchical system. It may also be a planner, this is my impression from posts here and playing the game, I don't look at the actual code cause its time consuming. Here is a more complete list of AI frameworks: Ad-hoc rules Finite State Machine (FSM) Hierarchical FSM Behavior Tree (BT) Planner Utility-based system Artificial Neural Network
  4. Can I ask what AI format you use? Planner, hierarchy, utility, behavior tree?
  5. How is the current GUI done? GAE uses wxwidgets I think and it is pretty customizable. You can move any part of the GUI anywhere on the screen and even save it there for next time. The elements can all be resized to 3 different sizes individually. It also takes very little work to add new panels or whole new elements. The UI config panel is sort of annoying, especially when it saves with no spaces though.
  6. I went ahead and read your post in the other thread. I am pretty opposed to AI having a view of the whole map and the units on it. As regards waiting till your army is above the total enemy population, I prefer that, I like to tech up as opposed to rush. But it seems like such a big limitation. Plus if the enemy has multiple settlements it would be smarter to hit a small one and then retreat. I think that all games should have optimal targeting systems that tell them what the best thing to auto attack is. As regards defensive coordination it should be possible to implement some checks to decide whether horses should run ahead or stay at the same speed. Can't account for everything though.
  7. Can you give me a list of things that you wish had engine support? Also anyone working on Qbot care to weigh in?
  8. I don't understand what you mean by manually. Do you mean scripting them as opposed to direct from the engine?
  9. I have been working on re writing the AI for my game engine, because I feel like the Glest/GAE AI is pretty terrible. I am going through all of the parts of the engine and rewriting them, mostly for experience purposes and some things that are just below par. In any case I have been reading a lot of articles about how AI is generally done and its actually quite hard to find AI discussion that isn't about pathfinding. I always conceived of pathfinding as a separate discipline from actual AI with some interaction where you want to path around dangerous areas and such. But I guess I am weird. I was reading through the qBot and Marylin threads and seeing how your AI compares to Glest/GAE and the AI changes I am planning to make. It was pretty interesting reading although it was several hundred posts and took me several minutes to get through. According to the threads you guys haven't implemented many automation commands like patrol and stuff like optimal targeting. Do you plan to get stuff like that in the game? I know you have a trade system implemented. Are you going to be implementing an escort command? Escort is like guard but for mobile units, did you set up a guard command? Somone in the thread was talking about city centers getting a designation as a critical building which causes units to default to guarding them. I noticed someone was mentioning a problem I saw in Glest/GAE/MG and also I was playing some Zero-K and it had the same issue. Attacking AI units are running in singly or in pairs instead of groups and getting decimated. Have you been working on anything to deal with that? In my game I am adding automation on the player side because I want more of a grand strategy feel but also with some Hero units that are kinda like RPG characters. I intend to port those capabilities over to the AI as well because its a lot of the same issues that AI have. For players you get your time freed up from micro and for AI you get the ability to use groups of units more in sync like a human would do. The game simulates actual armies from the individual to the army level with squads, regiments, and so forth. Although technically you could use just the squad and army layers if you like because freedom. Having a unit allows easy selection of groups and the ability to click a button and have units bunch up or to fan out in a line to dodge AOE, both of which keep your units together when they run in so they don't get picked off. This is relevant to my question about units working together on the AI side since in games without levels of coordination you would need some sort of flexible system to make units behave similarly. Have you guys done work on implementing a pick up system where the AI checks what units appear to be attacking the same unit/area and coordinates them to attack better? I know a lot of games, especially Blizzards don't really care about making really good AI because they are mostly e-sports so only multiplayer matters. The main focus of my first game is a 50 mission campaign since a given match would last too long for multiplayer really. I mean, who wants an 8 hour multiplayer match? The only thing I've really found AI wise that is comparable to my goal is a few niche wargames that focus on formations and units and grand strategy in WW2. Its really hard to find people to discuss RTS, as opposed to wargame, AI stuff. I played a bit of each of the Kohan games but they really only have their one formation thing with their 3 mods with different move speed and attack efficiency. How serious are devs and modders about AI? I gather that since 0 A.D. is heavily based on AO? games that you are probably more traditional and less automated than the game I am working on. I suspect that most of this conversation, assuming anyone is interested, will end up focusing on difficulty without resource cheats. Is there a plan to focus on making an AI bot that can approach human skill without giving resource modifiers?
  10. Is 0 AD capable of supporting certain mechanics necessary for non historical genres? For instance in a fantasy game you may need to be able to cast spells, and both fantasy and sci fi have methods of teleporting units either through a building or a unit command. Sci fi or fantasy games might also need pet type units, such as the drones deployed from the carrier in starcraft. Some parts like mages summoning creatures can probably just use training commands with alternate animations and time to train, and stuff like shape shifting could be accomplished with some sort of unit morph/upgrade command. In general, how much modding support is offered for non historical gameplay?
×
×
  • Create New...