The AI

2»

Comments

  • UweTellkampf
    UweTellkampf Posts: 376 Mover and Shaker
    edited October 2017
    ElvaanStrider said:
    @UweTellkampf

    I reread your excellent OP and you say the AI will not withhold cards. I have witnessed this multiple times. 

    In fact, I cannot get 100% on the first Story chapter block because the AI stops playing cards after I kill 4 creatures (need 6 on 1.2). I kill them, destroy all Supports and it sits there with 6x fully charged cards.
    Some cards need a certain set-up in order to be played. Spells, for example, that won't cast without a creature on the board. I don't remember the mentioned story line encounter, but it could be that this is the case: AI is not really withholding the cards, it just lacks the possibility to play them, since they are bound to the particular setup (and I guess, here, the setup involves a creature). Since it also can't discard cards (actually this is another point of possible improvement), it just sits there forever. @Mainloop25 gave you some advice how to handle this situation. Also it could be helpful to take something along which discards the cards of your opponent - to "make space" so to say for a creature.
  • TheDragonHermit
    TheDragonHermit Posts: 465 Mover and Shaker
    I personally would love to see, for card and ability handling at least, something akin to [redacted]'s Gambit system. We could even get something like an AI tournament were the AIs can fight in the background and players get rewards based on performance.
  • Corn_Noodles
    Corn_Noodles Posts: 477 Mover and Shaker
    I like Greg the way he is. Why does everyone want to change Greg?
  • Kinesia
    Kinesia Posts: 1,621 Chairperson of the Boards
    Corn Noodles said:
    I like Greg the way he is. Why does everyone want to change Greg?

    Personally the main things that _really_ break my illusion are when he kills his own creatures for no reason...
    I just want the biggest problems gone, but doing it right is better than just tweaking things.
    (Difficulty levels based on a rating system would actually be cool, honestly, but I don't care too much about it.)

    I care about longevity, about being able to play this after I retire.

    The problem is that _long_ term it's probably not maintainable the way it is. If Magic and Puzzle Quest keep going (and I _want_ them to more than anything) then there will be tons of new sets to add and things to do. The current system is set up so it takes far far too much work to add new sets. The tweaks have to be done directly to Greg, like stitching on new body parts, and his Frankenstein stitches are showing.

    New sets should be more like a new set of clothes than extra limbs.


  • TheDragonHermit
    TheDragonHermit Posts: 465 Mover and Shaker
    Kinesia said:
    Corn Noodles said:
    I like Greg the way he is. Why does everyone want to change Greg?

    Personally the main things that _really_ break my illusion are when he kills his own creatures for no reason...
    I just want the biggest problems gone, but doing it right is better than just tweaking things.
    (Difficulty levels based on a rating system would actually be cool, honestly, but I don't care too much about it.)

    I care about longevity, about being able to play this after I retire.

    The problem is that _long_ term it's probably not maintainable the way it is. If Magic and Puzzle Quest keep going (and I _want_ them to more than anything) then there will be tons of new sets to add and things to do. The current system is set up so it takes far far too much work to add new sets. The tweaks have to be done directly to Greg, like stitching on new body parts, and his Frankenstein stitches are showing.

    New sets should be more like a new set of clothes than extra limbs.


    This is why I like a Gambit type AI design. Give the players the reigns on the AI and reward them for good AI design with AI tournaments. This could even give PvE more personality with the devs making a more flexible AI for each node. After that there is just making the AI match gems.
  • shteev
    shteev Posts: 2,031 Chairperson of the Boards
    Corn Noodles said:
    I like Greg the way he is. Why does everyone want to change Greg?
    I like you. I still want to change you tho.
  • octal9
    octal9 Posts: 593 Critical Contributor
    edited October 2017
    Kinesia said:

    The current system is set up so it takes far far too much work to add new sets. The tweaks have to be done directly to Greg, like stitching on new body parts, and his Frankenstein stitches are showing.
    Part A is true, but any system would take a similar amount of time to add new sets. Every card has data associated with it - art, stats, actions, mana, evergreens, and many others. They're just that though - data. Every card is data. That's it. Nothing else.

    Actions themselves have implementations but those are written once, and then can be applied to any card. The reason you see issues with Skywhaler's Shot and similar is because the card data is wrong.

    Part B ("the tweaks have to be done...") is incorrect. The AI is not modified in any way unless a new board mechanic is added (an overload consideration was added in KLD, as it was a brand new board mechanic - note that embalm/eternalize are simply activation gems and thus already have a consideration).

    The issue isn't that they have to keep adding to the AI. It's that the original implementation of the AI is too simplistic - and in some cases (see: match consideration for match 5s & supports) is flat out wrong. What they have in place is a good framework, but is currently insufficient.
  • shteev
    shteev Posts: 2,031 Chairperson of the Boards
    octal9 said:

    Every card is data.
    Every card is great. If a card is wasted, God gets quite irate.
  • ElvaanStride
    ElvaanStride Posts: 62 Match Maker
    There's a universall problem in coding. For a game like this there are layers of code built and balanced on how the previous layer works. Once you change something so fundamental, it can and usually causes bugs and unexpected results down the line.

    I've seen many games "break" from tweaking the AI too much and development spends all their time fixing and not creating. Game goes stale from lack of content and dies.
  • IM_CARLOS
    IM_CARLOS Posts: 640 Critical Contributor
    I agree that Greg could play a little better. Match better gem's and priorize cards and loyality effects. But for spell targets it's very tricky. I remember a Online Game of "Paper" Magic an XBox (2009 or 2012 iteration), so very limited card pool, but I won by a silly move: target my own creature with DD wich results in instant win through mirror damage to opponents (don't remember creature). This is what AI could not. Or should. Leave creative play for the players, to catch a reward or move to abetter board position. But yes:destroy his own creature without benefit, happens very often with Greg, should be avoided. 

  • shteev
    shteev Posts: 2,031 Chairperson of the Boards
    Poor D3. I bet when they started selling this infinitely expandable game, it didn't occur to them they might have to write some new code every now and again.
  • Corn_Noodles
    Corn_Noodles Posts: 477 Mover and Shaker
    shteev said:
    Poor D3. I bet when they started selling this infinitely expandable game, it didn't occur to them they might have to write some new code every now and again.

    When you have a money hat covering your eyes, it's hard to see anything else.
  • ElvaanStride
    ElvaanStride Posts: 62 Match Maker
    shteev said:
    Poor D3. I bet when they started selling this infinitely expandable game, it didn't occur to them they might have to write some new code every now and again.
    No company signs on to change fundamental code written by another party. That's playing with fire.

    Adding content, building on what is already there, is a lot easier and what you want in their position.
    ----------

    I'm not saying leave the AI as it is, but changing it already has Greg acting funny because of the trickle-down effect I described. Changes can be made, but they have to be careful is all.
  • Kinesia
    Kinesia Posts: 1,621 Chairperson of the Boards
    @octal9 I agree, I just think from the current behaviour we see too much that seems to be code driven rather than just data on the cards... Actually, my words don't driectly match my thinking, I need to detail it more.

    Like with Skywhalers... You shouldn't be telling the AI whether a card is "good" or "bad" to play on your own stuff. You should be just saying "This destroys a creature" and the AI should be able to work out that mostly you destroy the other players creatures but there are edge cases where you destroy you own.
    Instead of having to explicitly set every destruction effect the AI should be able to work out whether it's a good idea to destroy it's own stuff or not.
    The data on the card should be about what it can do and what it can target, but the AI should be deciding whether it's appropriate to cast on it's own thing.

    The current breakdown in responsibility isn't right.
  • Ohboy
    Ohboy Posts: 1,766 Chairperson of the Boards
    Those edge cases where you kill your own creatures would be very "intelligent" choices.

    Many human players have yet to unlock these decision tree branches properly. 
  • Kinesia
    Kinesia Posts: 1,621 Chairperson of the Boards
    The AI does it currently sometimes, but whether it's deliberately or coincidental I don't know...

  • shteev
    shteev Posts: 2,031 Chairperson of the Boards
    octal9 said:

    an overload consideration was added in KLD, as it was a brand new board mechanic
    Was it?? I never noticed Greg playing in any way which indicated he had some kind of consideration for energized gems...

Categories