Should the AI be smarter?

bbigler

We all know that the AI is pretty dumb, it misses match 5's all the time, it matches it's own special tiles when there are other options and sometimes uses the weaker of 2 powers of the same color. My question for you all is whether or not the overall game would be better with a smarter AI. This would certainly take some effort by the devs, but it can be done. The AI could also be tuned for certain characters in order to maximize their effectiveness. For example, 3* Widow could purposely place green tiles to get match 5's; Scarlett Witch could purposely use Hex Bolt to get more purple or try to destroy enemy special tiles; OR the AI could prioritize "battery" powers like IronMan40's Recharge; OR prioritize powers that put down strike tiles.

Now I know what you're thinking....if the AI is smarter, then matches would be harder and less fun. That could be true, but if they lowered the levels of the PvE opponents at the same time, then it evens out. The real difference would be in PvP. People with lesser teams would have a harder time defeating you and taking your points, but that's also true of you trying to beat better teams. Certain characters that are great to fight with but easy to defeat (such as 3* Widow) could be more of a threat. What I don't like about PvP is that my best fighting team may be easy to defeat because of the AI. One other possible benefit to an AI upgrade is that it could feel like you're playing against a real person instead of a dumb machine over and over again.

One last crazy thought, what if you couldn't choose the character to attack and instead the enemy character that made the last match would be your target? (just like on your side)

MojoWild

No.
Typing more to meet the minimum.

bluewolf

No, no, no. You also forgot the humor of the AI casting self damaging powers and killing off their own characters. Always makes me chuckle.

SnowcaTT

Should players be required to have more losses?

Nightglider1

SnowcaTT wrote:

Should players be required to have more losses?

At the risk of being the forum pariah, we're "supposed to lose."

thisone

Don't forget, a "smarter" AI equals a more predictable AI. So sure.

firethorne

If I had to do only one clear of everything for the rewards, sure. If I still have to do 4 clears for progression or 6+ for placement, absolutely not.

westnyy2

If it's harder and I lose it costs me 3 health packs and points. If I have a defensive loss I only lose points. No problem with the dumb AI here.

Fightmastermpq

It would make PvP truer. I play a hell of a lot better than the AI and it's always bothered me that I lose to weaker teams on defense because the dumb AI controls my team instead of me. But ultimately I think a smarter AI would result in a less enjoyable experience. You'd lose more often to similar teams, battles would take longer, and it would make climbing in PvP more frustrating than it already is.

I think it's fine the way it is.

StarScream

If you could show proof of the AI missing a match five or even passing up match four for a three that would be great. I have yet to see it. The opposite in fact. My matches often set them up for a match four or five.

JVReal

As long as these guys don't help develop it...

stochasticism

There was a blog post on this a little over a year ago.

http://www.demiurgestudios.com/engineer ... -opponent/

tl;dr: We would be crushed like the insignificant bugs we are if they made the AI smarter.

Jarvind

Noooo thank you. I'm fine with wasting a third of my health pack supply whenever a **** cascade hands a win to the AI at the current rate. And I dunno about anyone else, but I find the AI's inability to ignore match-4s or see L- and T-shaped match 5's to be a lifesaver pretty often.

acescracked

Fightmastermpq wrote:

... I play a hell of a lot better than the AI...

I don't believe you.

BearVenger

Nightglider1 wrote:

SnowcaTT wrote:

Should players be required to have more losses?

At the risk of being the forum pariah, we're "supposed to lose."

We were only "supposed to lose" in a specific survival-style Boss event, framed as contributing to an alliance victory in the long run.

I don't support many specific game philosophies in MPQ, but I'd love to see this gripe kept in the perspective it was offered.

Smudge

Without reading the whole thread and at the risk of repetition, no, the AI should absolutely not be made smarter.

The way it is programmed to play, it already executes its strategy flawlessly. With punishing scaling, this problem is much worse. It may only "see" linear match-5s and randomly select tiles for its tile-targeting powers, but we don't need it to be more strategic.

It already plays perfectly according to its coding. I don't play perfectly. I don't want it being better than it is.

Uninspired

I don't think we need a smarter AI in general, just for using certain powers. This would eliminate some of the imbalance for certain characters on defense in PVP, and realistically these are characters you almost never see in PVE. There are plenty of examples, but a few that jump to my mind:

-Human torch should wait until it has more green AP (8+?) to use Flame Jet
-Elektra should wait until there's an enemy attack tile or she has enough purple to use double-double cross twice (even if she still waited a turn to use it a second time, it's a big change)
-Stop letting Quicksilver switch two identical tiles.

famousfoxking

The MTGPQ AI is a little smarter in these regards: it does make match 5's (L's at least, I'm not certain I've ever seen it make a T) and it seems to prioritize matches that will destroy a player owned tile. If the MPQ AI acted like the MTGPQ AI and nothing else changed, I'd never play again.

Phumade

Uninspired wrote:

-Human torch should wait until it has more green AP (8+?) to use Flame Jet
-Elektra should wait until there's an enemy attack tile or she has enough purple to use double-double cross twice (even if she still waited a turn to use it a second time, it's a big change)
-Stop letting Quicksilver switch two identical tiles.

As an academic question how you would you accomplish those tasks?

Different AI profiles that emphasize different approaches? Great idea and lets proceed.
A more relentless AI that calculates for cascades? Hell No! Look to chess AIs as an example. A chess AI that never misses a move is only fun to elite level players. A chess AI that more accurately the tactics and foibles of how people play?, great idea that can and should be explored.

The more interesting question is to ask how should QS switch tiles and in what situations? And then reprioritizing colors based on the synergies of teammates.

If we really pursue this line of discussion, we should really be asking "What ways the AI should be smarter? and how as players do we reoptimize our play?"

JackTenrec

aesthetocyst wrote:

Depending on the color and board layout, I leave match-4s all the time, so I can "dictate" the AI's next move. Bonus if I am running Loki

It's getting ridiculous how often I ignore the boosted characters and use Loki instead, particularly if there are tile-producing Dark Avengers (Daken, Bullseye) around. It's also ridiculous how often I have more than six Mischief tiles on the board simultaneously.

MyNameIsRed

Funny, I was thinking this exact thing the other day.

I would be ok with smarter AI if it was tied to the clearance levels. So in theory, the better you got - the better they got.

In saying that, my vote is no, I don't want to see the AI smarter.