[freeciv-ai] Re: Opinions on some AI issues

[Gregory Berkolaiko <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Raahul Kumar wrote:

> A little too much randomness. A civ that focuses on Republic and Sewer
> System/Aqueducts with big luxury rates will be too powerful compared to the
> alternatives.

I would recommend that a ruleset author determines the weights of a tech 
in all branches of knowledge.  Then one can make Republic heavy in all the 
branches.  Same with the Railroad.  

On the other hand, it is only more historically accurate that, say,
Mongols concentrate more on warfare and ignore Republic completely.  
They would be insignificant by 1700AD, but would greatly harass their
neightbours before that --- which will make the game more entertaining
IMO.

> > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
> > III. Danger estimation.
> > 
> > When evaluating danger, it is important to remember the most dangerous 
> > units.  In order to attack them later.  Right now the priority is to 
> > attack more expensive and less defended units.  But choosing to attack a 
> > caravan over a guarded howitzer can be deadly (another argument in favour 
> > of fuzziness: AI will always attack one and not the other -- and one can 
> > exploit it).  Of course it is better to kill both :)
> 
> Depends. If an air unit is attacking, and is a non veteran unit, better to go
> for the easy kill that will make it veteran. It depends on whether the unit 
> can

It is still of more importance to remove the enemy unit posing immediate 
danger to your city.

> > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
> > IV. Invasions.
> > 
> > Invasion targets should be selected on a high level.  The current 
> > "everybody is going there so I go there too" attitude is pathetic.  But 
> > what is a good city to attack?
> 
> Nearest enemy island is good enough. Once we select an island,if there is a
> capital city we take that first. If there are wonder cities, we take them
> ranked in order of wonder power. After that, take cities from biggest to
> smallest.

Raimar gave a much better list of relevant parameters.  You don't want to 
waste your armies attacking a well-defended capital.  You need to have a 
base nearby and a group of industrial centres not too far away.  Etc etc

> > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
> > V. Ruleset tips.
> > 
> > More!
> > 
> > For example:
> > 
> > Bodyguarding is a great idea.  CivIII got it (I think they stole quite a
> > few features from FreeCiv, actually).  But to see a rifleman guarded by a
> > mech.inf. is hilarious!  It happens because rifleman had 5A > 5D which
> > qualifies him as an attacking unit.  And 6A/6D mech.inf. is a defender!  
> > How do we distinguish an attacking unit from a defending one?  We can 
> > write complicated functions or we can use more role tips in the rulesets.
> 
> No need for complex functions. If a military unit has less attack power(hps *
> fp * attack rating) than the defending unit, it won't be defended. The non
> military check makes sure we don't ignore caravans, spys etc. Probably
> something as simple as fp * attack rating will do.

Erratum: rifleman has 5A > 4D therefore qualifies as an attacking unit.  
And it is being protected by a mech.inf.!!

Anyway, my solution would be to 
(a) use DefendOk and DefendGood much more in the code
(a) introduce NeedGuard and maybe some variants to easily identify if a 
unit deserves being guarded.


G.