Robot Entertainment

Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

Last post 12-31-2007, 9:42 AM by capn qwerty. 67 replies.
Page 3 of 5 (68 items)   < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  •  09-30-2007, 1:25 PM 102688 in reply to 102063

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    ya know, that sums it up.

  •  10-01-2007, 7:57 AM 102989 in reply to 101549

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    A fun AI for me is one that has its own way of fighting like i have C&C 3 and i notice in that game

    that the CPAI's sometimes  are the exact same thing as another and that just makes me wanna throw my

    controller ...=(

  •  10-02-2007, 11:40 PM 103473 in reply to 101549

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    Thunder:

    Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    A.I.

    Artificial intelligence is ridiculously important in games, especially RTS games.  There is Entity AI, which controls things like units and how they act/react as well as Computer Player AI (CPAI) that you play against in a skirmish game.  I’m sure we’ve all played games where units didn’t move or act the way we wanted them to, or as efficiently as they could.  Many a frustrated gamer has thrown their controller or pounded their fists on the desk after getting mowed down by a CPAI opponent that made them look like a Grunt biting the ankle of a Brute.

    Like a lot of systems in games, if the Entity AI is doing its job, the player shouldn’t really notice it.  Their units are moving where they are told, they target the enemies that they are most effective at killing, and so on.  This is an ongoing struggle for developers when a game is being made, as the rules for the game can change daily, as can the role and number of units in the game.  Once the game gets a bit more fleshed out, the monumental task of creating what we call the CPAI begins.  

    Ultimately, the philosophy that we’ve had at Ensemble Studios is that the most fun games are when you think you might lose but don’t.  The CPAI should attempt to provide the player with this challenge in each game.  We want to set the difficulty levels to where most players will find a challenge, but there will be a level that can beat them if they start making mistakes. Some of the questions that Technical Director Dave Pottinger sent out to the company awhile back to start gathering feedback on how the CPAI should behave were:

    What makes a fun AI for you to play against or with?

    Do you want the AI to try to coordinate with you as an ally or should it just do its own thing and not much up your plans?

    Should the AI beat you?

    How do you want the difficulty levels to work?

    I played a TON of Lord of the Rings BFME II on the 360 so I think I could provide some good input.  The human element is crucial.  The AI should only make choices and comand units as fast as a human can, maybe only slightly faster if on a tougher difficulty.  Also, the AI shouldn't constantly use the same strategy.  Say a rush at the beginning of the game may logically be the best choice.  So what?  Human players have different strategies, so the AI should change it up too.  Sometimes they should all out rush at the beginning, sometimes they should sit back and defend.  Sometimes they should try to contain you, sometimes they should do a mixture.  However, being that its usually cooler to see lots of units be built, as well as more advanced units, its usually bettere if the AI does not make the game last 10 minutes by either eliminating the player quickly or making a mistake and getting eliminated off the bat.  Also the use of certain tactics makes it a lot more realistic, with diversions and such.  They closest thing I could think of is find out how many people play the game, then come up with a couple of styles of play.  Although it would be cool if the AI changed strategies given certain events in the game.

     As far as AI on the same team, working together is tough.  Integration would be hard, as is normally seen in any game.  It seems as though the computer always makes the worst choice when they are on your team, hurting them and you.  I would say self sufficiency is probably the key, with options to request assistence in offense, defense, etc.  Maybe some other cool stuff too, like suggest building forward bases at choke points and such.  Maybe let the player choose what kind of companion he wants to play with, so he knows roughly what kind of strategy his teammate AI will be doing.

    The AI should beat you depending on the difficulty and mistakes you make.  Naturally, at higher levels, fewer mistakes should be allowed.  While being on the brink of destruction can be fun, it can also get old.  I would say making sure the AI wins certain battles but doesn't roll on to dominate after every advantage is important.  Its kind of hard to say for this area.  Again, just try to base it on capitalizing on mistakes made by the player, not by using a processor to make decisions and moves faster.

    Difficulty levels should probably grouped, so maybe a similar AI for each group but slight tweaks, such as a total "move" count.  What I mean is that maybe vary the speed at which the AI makes decisions, and the number of decisions made, in each difficulty level.  Maybe levels of beginner, average, advanced, and expert, with a couple of interim levels in each.  Often times the levels of the computer are stepped with to much change between levels.  If you had a major tweaks and minor tweaks for each of the major ones, this could smooth things out a lot.

    Also, if I might comment on the individual unit AI.  Let me give an example of one of the most frustrating events I have ever faced, over and over again.  Take the archer/pikemen/calvary trio in LOTR.  To give a quick overview, archers dont have much armer but deal a lot of damage over distances, and can be trampled by running horses.  They are also vulnerable when enemies are close.  You always want your archers to sit back and not get involved in fighting.  However, since archers engaged enemies at longer distances, they would also have more sight, and see an enemy sooner than pikemen, who had a lot of armor.  Instead of sitting back and waiting for the enemies to get closer, the archers would run ahead of the pikemen.  2 things would happen.  First, they would be exposed to horses to get trampled, as well as any other unit..  The pikemen didn't take the damage like they were supposed to, and the archers would die fast.  Secondly, it would take so *** long for the archers to get set to shoot again, they would lose valuable time that they could be shooting the enemy, because once they got within range they would start setting up, and only engage at half the distance because the enemy units would be running at them.  Essentially, the archers would just run out of cover and die.  Therefore, you should have certain types of units interact with each other.  If some units are supposed to defend other units against certain threats, that should be their priority.  I am sure yall know what I am talking about.  Just make troops interact with each other in an intelligent way.

  •  10-03-2007, 3:27 AM 103484 in reply to 101549

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    AI's are supposed to be intelligent. But intelligence in an RTS is hard to define, yes...

     What I've noticed with many RTS games that have an AI difficulty selection is that if you chose a harder difficulty, more units are produced, they are far more aggressive, and the types and styles of units varies, but the overall strategy seemed to be the same. Heavy hitters either in front to much up my infantry and then light mobilities to cause havoc, or in back while the mobiles draw mine out for targets...

     
    it gets old after a while. I would hope for an AI that actually learns progressively. Easy - duh, you win. If you don't, check your REAL pulse. Normal - good variables with units and structures, high defense (winning shouldn't be an easy task for the moderate player, but more experienced players find it a cakewalk.). Having this difficulty be considered "normal" should state that the computer should be anticipating action while formulating reaction based on my unit structure and type, but not necessarily storing my tactics all that much. The same tactic, though, should rarely work twice. Hard - Experienced players have issues with this, but it IS very possible to succeed. The computer should attack first and foremost, leaving no quarter and expecting the same, but should be intelligent enough to know what to strike first (lemme think.... Warthog... Scorpion... I'm infantry...). Also, as the game continues it doesn't just rely on event and coded script to make an action (i.e. after three minutes of non-battle, initiate battle_mod_3455.hex or something like that.), it should be based on player performance. If I attack first, then would an immediate counterattack be wise or should the computer wait to stranglehold possible resources? Then, Legendary (you HAVE to put that in for all us HALO geeks... please...) but this legendary should function to far surpass the user.

    I have four base difficulties to chose from, and then I'm given this other option, some kind of text and a radio button that says "initiate game instruction" or something like that. When and if this button/checkbox is activated, the game's AI should have a complete and total view of the field - my base included - and be forming strategies based on this, my unit movement, my structure placement, target acquisition and timing (when what's made where/what high damage and high health unit I use most etc.) so that when the time comes, the enemy is LITERALLY ready for me and waiting or can chose to screw me over completely, totally, and utterly. It might not start off hard - say a three tier session that's demolished easily at first - but by the time the second skirmish is prepared, the AI knows what I go for - and if the button's still marked, it's still learning. So, in a sense, every player should be able to make their OWN worst nightmare on their own system that makes them think constantly and gives them no room to move. Have the Legendary option difficulty offline until you beat the game on Normal/Heroic and you HAVE to have that checkbox marked for at least three games, allowing the computer to truly be ready for you - just like the Covenant.

    The real issue that came to my mind, though, as I thought this out was finding a way to limit the processes on the AI to a couple thousand so the game isn't impossible, just nearly so - that way, you accomplish the goal you stated and in doing so Legendary will be a a fun pain in the rear.

    Hope this helped....

     


    When cities burn and armies turn and flee in disarray,
    Cowards will cry "tis best to fly and fight another day."
    But warriors know it, in their marrow when they die and fall:
    It is better to have fought and lost then ne'er have fought at all.
  •  10-06-2007, 10:48 AM 104446 in reply to 102435

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    there is something that bugs me.

    when it comes to cannons on units, AOE II's AI was terribly unbalanced. not that it is uber difficult or annoying, but it exceeds how even a pro player would micro his units. every time you shot with a cannon the unit that would be aimed at, and only that one, would gently move to the side and avoid the hit. its ok that people would do that, but its not an automated move, so your units wont do it by themselves, and you could be leading 5 fronts at the same time and all enemy units would be unharmed by cannons. and because of that is doesnt feel like youre playing agains another player but that each enemy units is alive and yours are just dumb puppets.

     

    it would be great to have both groups as one, either the dumb puppets or the alive units, and for an RTS its better if the AI plays like a player and not that your own units go crazy by theselves



  •  10-07-2007, 12:50 PM 104791 in reply to 101559

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    hey c'mon the Halo movie is coming out in 2009.
  •  10-07-2007, 5:48 PM 104840 in reply to 104791

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    not no more
    "The pain of war cannot exceed the woe of aftermath"-Led Zeppelin

  •  10-07-2007, 6:18 PM 104851 in reply to 101550

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    can i ask you something
    Th@t Nikk@ J@y J@y!!!
  •  10-09-2007, 1:08 PM 105506 in reply to 104851

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    Im Looking Forward To This Game Soo Much!
    I Just Hope It Delivers =l

     
    And I Think An AI Should Help You Out In Your Attacks And Things Like That, But Also Go Off And Do Its Own Thing. As Sometimes You Want To Do Things Your Own Way But You Would Have Your Ally Doing Everything Instead, But At The Same Time If You Are Getting Owned By The Enemy You Are Going To Want Some Back Up Arn't You.

     

    And Also I Would Like It So That You Can Play Against AI's On Xbox Live As Sometimes I Want To Play With My Friends But I Dont Want To Play With Them Against Any Other Humans.
     Aswell .. I Think That The Game Should Allow 2 Persons To Have A Big Base Like Take LOTH BFME2 For Example .. In That Game If You Want To Playt Siege Then Only One Person Is Allowed In The Fortress, Well You Can Get Another In But That Would Mean Shortage Of Money And Things Like That.

    And My Final Point Is That There Should Be More Than Just 4 Persons Allowed To Play, Because Although 2 On 2 Is Really Fun .. I Believe 3 On 3, Or 4 On 4 Even Would Be Fantastic And Real Fun To Play!

    Thanks For Reading :D 

  •  10-11-2007, 4:15 PM 106420 in reply to 101549

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    1) what makes AI fun? giving the enemies many options and ways to attack, and not having your AI drive off cliffs, or drive into vehicles, or snipe a scarab, or accidentally do friendly fire.

    2) if you have an ally, he should be able to support himself and co-ordinate an attack. that does not mean he gives you all of his resources and goes home. that means he knows that bringing on the hurt will equal win.

    3) If the AI never beats me, why should i play? and if it does beat me, is it requiring me to get tactical, or to use alot of money? (sorry i threw questions right back at ya)

    4) the 4 classic levels of difficulty: easy, normal, heroic, and legendary. easy should introduce the gameplay and controls to those who are new to RTS's. normal should introduce features unique to this game only, and the enemies should be able to use bigger and badder enemies, but they should remain as smart as those on easy mode. heroic doesn't need any tutoring on what to do, and the enemy should be able to use every single thing in it's arsenal and try to stop you. gamers who are fans of the RTS genre should find heroic as their normal mode. legendary is as smart as it goes, but it's not impossibly smart. they know big guns hurt, they know what you can do, and they think they know how to stop you. but can they? that's for teh l337 gamer to find out.


    my gamertag's my name, so add meh!
  •  10-13-2007, 8:52 AM 106888 in reply to 106420

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    If thr AI is anything like C&C 3, (lawd help us) it will be boring, i want an AI thatn dosnt just frag me with tons and tons of troops. I want one that will think if new tactics.

     


  •  10-16-2007, 6:26 PM 108022 in reply to 101549

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    First, id like to say great job concerning ur progress so far ive been keeping up to date as best as possible with the Halo Universe in general and i like how the E3 show turned out and how the latest demonstration looked.


    Ok back to the matter at hand the AI. Ive played Numerous RTS games and the AI is always been the deciding factor in gameplay. The main thing to worry about is whether your AI will be reacting to your presence on the simulated terrain which should be its universe. The AI as an ally should be able to react to your strategy, a useful but underdeveloped assist i have come across is being able to send basic messages to the AI which stimulates a response. for example on Age of empires typing the number 35 into the chat would tell the AI you were attacking and the AI would respond and Assist you in the attack as best he could. the AI however always responded as if it was able to help you even when it wasnt so the player often sent in his army with no support only to get counter-attacked and beaten sensless into the ground. The fact that two human players can talk to each other is a big advantage over a player and a computer and if you dont want to go with the old fallback of making the computer better by increasing its ability to multitask or giving it more resources to level the playing field then the best way would to be to allow the AI and the player to communicate. this option comes with problems such as the AI Responding incorrectly or in a misleading way which can cause the balance to fold in half.

    Now on to the AI as an enemy. The enemy in most RTS's ive played simply attempt to recreate preexisting strategies such as build so many buildings before attacking with so many units and can be crippled by destroying one building and waiting for it to attempt to rebuild over and over agian until the AI runs out of money. I think the AI should be able to make an informed choice of what tactic to use based on its perception of the enemy(s) it is facing. A library of tactical and economical strategies should be available to alow the AI to adapt to a given situation based on things known about the enemy and itself, eg. available resources, time into the game(possible enemy forces to counter), Types of enemy units encountered so far, Best way to suppliment the units an ally has, How many highly mobile units an ally may have to help defend AI's base if needed, Defendability of the AI base, the space available for building structures, Possible choke points that would be used as an advantage or disadvantage depending on proximity to known enemy structures, the Activity of the enemy whether agressive or relatively docile(defencive). Those are a few of the variables that i would take into account when im playing the game and the AI should be able to take in to account to perhaps a lesser extent also. The AI's may also have seperate names, this allows you to form strategies agianst each one as you play it. ALSO the AI's could be able to create a profile on each player it has played in the last 4 weeks or so allowing it to select strategies it has used effectively agianst certian profiles before or to avoid strategies that have been beaten. this would make the ultimate AI and a fantastically adaptible versitile and overall FUN game.

    I realise that what i have suggested would allow the player to cheat by changing the AI's profile of the player but TBH those people shouldnt play the game if they arent going to do it properly. I also relise that to incorporate these variables into the AI and the Library of strategies would be Extensive and cause the overall game size to be huge i think Ensemble Studio's is up to the task and that players wont mind sacraficing Disk space to play what could prove to be greatest RTS ever made!

     Ps. Is there anywhere to get a copy of the Halo Compendium or is that top secret and highly guarded by Lasers and Robot Guards lol?(i asked bungie but they ignored that part of my post... and the emails xD)

  •  10-17-2007, 7:24 PM 108389 in reply to 101549

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    I think that the AI should be a challenge, and beat you when you make mistakes, that way, you are never bored with the game, there is always a challenge, and always somthing to do. In Halo Wars, the best idea for it is to be able to set custom armies, (your army and your enemies army) pick a battlefield, set objectives for your enemy and you, then fight to the DEATH!! Thats what will make Halo Wars the coolest game ever.
  •  10-18-2007, 2:46 PM 108512 in reply to 108389

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    I personally feel that the AI in an RTS, as almost all the other people here have said, should be a challenge but, at the same time not so challenging that you fail 20 times in a row or untill you have played it so much you know exactly what your opponents next move is. The AI should be unpredictable yet not so unpredictable that they do some uber-move that wipes out all your units. Your allied AI should do what you tell them to do.Not like the Mariens on Halo that drive the Warthog when you are gunner.....anyone who has played Halo knows what I mean. All in all, the AI should be GREAT, Ai is an important thing in RTSs, so if you fub up the AI then you messed up the entire game. The developers should spend A LOT of time to perfect the AI and delever a strong player-like AI to keep the gamers guessing for hundreds of hours on in.

     As for the difficulty settings, I would love to see Ensemble Studios pay homage to the roots of this game and have the classic Easy, Normal, Heroic, and Legenday. But, if they must change the difficulty up the Attack/Defense settings as mentioned in an earlier post would be fun to tweek with so gamers can find a challangeing setting that fits their game style. And, it would be fun to play with turning Defense to 10 and Attack to 1 and see how the play style of the enemies change.


    'People, like us, are more than meets the eye' -Optimus Prime
  •  10-20-2007, 5:38 AM 109053 in reply to 101782

    Re: Halo Wars Update 09.24.07

    hey guys LONG TIME NO SEE yes ive been away for a ong time and yes im sorry, but i couldnt help it, anyway about AI i think it should be more challenging than a human opponent on the hardest difficulty so that it can give you decent exp for online gameplay etc.


    It's the decisions we make, when we have no time to make them, that define who we are
Page 3 of 5 (68 items)   < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next >
View as RSS news feed in XML