Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-ai: April 2002:
[freeciv-ai] Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [RFC][Patch] AI can fly v2 (fwd)

[freeciv-ai] Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [RFC][Patch] AI can fly v2 (fwd)

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: <freeciv-ai@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [freeciv-ai] Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [RFC][Patch] AI can fly v2 (fwd)
From: <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 13:30:45 +0200 (MEST)

On Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Raahul Kumar wrote:
> I agree with making them suffer. I suggest a 'Petr' test for the AI. If the
> hard AI can beat Petr on a regular basis, it's good enough. (Why Petr? Because
> he says he's a bad player).

I want the hardest AI to be capable of beating the top freeciv players
sometimes too.

> > Also I keep thinking that the client side AI should iterate through all
> > the enemy units it can see every turn, and record them. Then amortize
> > these memories somehow every turn, so that older memories are less
> > important than more recent. This is then used to estimate what kind of
> > units we need to combat the enemy.
> Amortise? I don't know why you want to do that. Just make older memories drop
> off as they are replaced by up-to-date info. I see no need to keep info of 
> what
> city x looked like 15 turns ago when we have info from 2 turns ago.

On turn 353 I see player A flying overhead with lots of Stealth Bombers.
Turns 354->375 I don't see any enemy units. On turn 376 I see some
Warriors moving around in the outskirts of my empire. It is turn 381.

In your scheme, it would have forgotten about those Stealth Bombers, and
geared up to kill his Warriors. Bad idea.


"Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason?
Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason."
 -- Sir John Harrington (1561-1612)

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]