Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-ai: October 2003:
[freeciv-ai] Re: (PR#4744) More pathfinding

[freeciv-ai] Re: (PR#4744) More pathfinding

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: freeciv-ai@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [freeciv-ai] Re: (PR#4744) More pathfinding
From: Sam Steingold <sds@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 10:29:48 -0400
Reply-to: sds@xxxxxxx

> * Jason Short <wqbewr=Ea4IRnhX+NXEi+YI9ZK5hvckyjnBID5s@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
> [2003-10-08 14:33:07 -0700]:
> Sam Steingold wrote:
>> `Go' appears to prefer diagonal paths, ignoring other circumstances.
>> If I send a transport (= defenseless unit) from a point with Cartesian
>> coordinates (0,0) to the point (0,10), `Go' will take it to (5,5)
>> diagonally and then to (0,10), diagonally again.
>> what if there is a hostile city near (5,5)?
>> I wouldn't want to approach it with a defenseless unit!
>> (Is this an AI issue?)
> Hmm, I think this was the case with the old goto in 1.14.

I see this in 1.13 that comes with rh9.

> But the pf goto selects a path that appears to be completely random
> (which is also not so good).

I see no reason for the path to be random.

> No doubt some sensible defaults could give the unit more intelligent 
> behavior:
> For military units:
> - Passing unknown tiles on the way.
> - Passing by enemy units on the way.

stopping when they encounter the enemy unit - so that I can decide
whether to attack or proceed.
(Q will patrol the area back and forth, this is not what I want!)

> For non-military units:
> - Staying away from enemy units.
> - Taking the most direct route possible.


Incidentally, I lost some bombers because I was confused by the "return
requirement".  WIBNI the system detected suicide missions and asked for


Sam Steingold ( running w2k
<> <> <>
<> <>
UNIX is a way of thinking.  Windows is a way of not thinking.

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