Newsgroups: comp.ai.games
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.duke.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!gatech!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!fnnews.fnal.gov!gw1.att.com!nntpa!not-for-mail
From: nak@gwe486.cb.att.com ()
Subject: Re: Message to All AI programmers
Message-ID: <D5v1DL.EpJ@nntpa.cb.att.com>
Sender: news@nntpa.cb.att.com (Netnews Administration)
Nntp-Posting-Host: gwe486.cb.att.com
Organization: AT&T GBCS/Bell Labs
References: <3k2pj7$gib@ccshst05.cs.uoguelph.ca> <3k5243$g7d@bmtlh10.bnr.ca> <3kakhb$m0g@news.doit.wisc.edu> <3kcbe7$f0f@uuneo.neosoft.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 1995 21:08:07 GMT
Lines: 47

In article <3kcbe7$f0f@uuneo.neosoft.com>,
Doug Walker <dwalker@panzer.atomic.com> wrote:
>Mark E. Anderson (wombats@nandi) wrote:
>: is actually an on-going "battle" between the programmers and
>: the players as the company that produces the game more or 
>: less promised to beef up the AI to meet the skill levels
>: of the players.
>
>Foolish promises are made to be broken.  If the game has any complexity
>to it at all, an average human player should be able to beat the HELL out 
>of a really good AI.  I dont know anyhting about hte game you mentioned
>so I dont have any way of judging the complexity.

And broad statements will fall on the sword of specifics.  Or something
witty like that.  The counter to "If the game.." above is to have a well
programmed AI.  If the AI is "really good" then "average" players will find
themselves with a challenge.

What I think most folks here find is that the average AI has real trouble
against the average player.  This I agree with.  Many people also despise
when the machine cheats.  I'm not fond of that either.


I wrote a tank-like multi-player game roughly comparable to Star Fleet
Battles (the game) suffers head on collision with Red Storm Rising (the
book).  In addition to the human-commanded ground and air units, I wrote an
AI for computer run ground units.

At first they were dumb, really dumb.  They got smarter.  They got better
and better, and never did they cheat.  At the end, against neophytes, they
could stomp forces twice their size.  Experts could achieve a kill ratio of
2.5:1 on a good day if nobody got a case of the dumbs on the human side.
If one of the human players messed up, that ratio could easily reverse.

It was intense to play.  One minute your defending an autobahn over the
Rhine and then all of a sudden your staring at a UNIX prompt wondering
where all that fire came from.  The transition could be VERY abrupt and
unsettling.

I'll post the paper I did for the 1991 Computer Game Developers Conference
as a separate posting.

---
Neil Kirby	DoD# 0783	nak@babel.cb.att.com
AT&T Bell Labs  Columbus OH     USA (614) 860-5304
President Internet BMW Riders
It's very red.  It's very fast.  And it's mine: 1994 R1100RSL
