Oct 6th 2023, 21:29:53
Originally posted by Gerdler:
I didnt care much for bots retalling as its so easy for a dev to turn that on and then leave without fine tuning it so that they dont act in a way entirely detrimental to the player base.
Bots going haywire and attacking/"warring", going all Skynet on us players. Now that is something that would get me motivated! DIE BOTS DIE
Couple years back when I played on AI I knocked up some bots that basically walked the top 10 every reset. all it took was a semi sane startup, taking advantage of arbitration's a result of dumb bot choices wrt market, and not doing the same dumb bot things myself. Throw in a bit of endgame de-stock logic and they did surprisingly good for the amount of effort I put it.
Without attacks it was kind of stale though.
I understand they have since been added, im not sure I have the impetus to revisit - need that lottery win ;) - but I think the main point im making is that AI servers are basically a mirror of what goes on on the human servers. Aside from wars and the odd suicider, the majority of the game tends to be towards optimising the netting, now (it seems) with the inclusion of additional methods of boosting. (No reason AI couldn't do that either, assuming FA has been implemented - even without some timed farming with zero def would work).
The truth is the game is pretty formulaic, and mostly predictable. So the think that stuck out most for me in what prime said (skynet!), is that if your bots could retal (which I think they can now), then you have a lot more scope for bots having varying degrees of personality from sane to crazy. This would fill the void left by the fact that nobody really has in game personality anymore. It's all been "optimised" out. Nobody attacks anyone because everyone has seen war-games. Which ironically, has made this into a non-war-game!
Coding formulaic bots was trivial, coding true "AI" bots with faux emotion. That sounds lie more fun. You know how it goes in tourney, a single grab from a big guy, might be worth letting it go but it leaves a mark. Another grab, then that player feels shoved a bit more. Now you are weighing the 'do I care more about my finish than I do about taking revenge". A simple example but something you could easily model as a basic personality trait in a bot. You only need a few other simple rules along these lines, for some more complex behaviours to emerge. Perhaps bots that were allies, might see attacks on their friends as something that proves them into action (or at least increments a counter, that might eventually cross a threshold). Failed ops, what are they up to, should I attack preemptively. Am I big relative to another company, does it lookliek I might get away with a grab on them...
Randomise the behavioural thresholds, randomise the degree to which bots 'feelings' are moved by certain actions. You've essentially created (albeit somewhat simplistic) human-like players - at least in so much as my experience of having played tourney over the years.
Throw 350 of those into alliance and you have a very different game dynamic. Being the best netter is no longer about logging in, farming bots without recourse, optimising playing turns by following a formula. It becomes also about assessing risk/reward - paying attention to behaviour of bots, actually having to considered what constitutes reasonable defence.
Maybe i'm just dreaming and maybe this is way outside of people's comfort zone, but after a couple years away, I come back and all I see is same old same old.