[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [PATCH] aiunit.c ai_military_findvictim() cleanup (PR#1264)

[Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear diary, on Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 03:51:42AM CET, I got a letter,
where Raahul Kumar <raahul_da_man@xxxxxxxxx> told me, that...
> > > I was wrong in that according to Petr the AI does become a republic. 
> > > Frankly,
> > > I have not yet seen that in any game I have ever played. In order of 
> > > popularity
> > > I have seen:
> > > 
> > > Despotism
> > > Monarchy
> > > Communism
> > 
> > I usually check mainly AI which are able to compete with me ;-) and they are
> > Republic most times (or Monarchy rarely).
> > 
> 
> This is bizarre. What does determine the tech path for ai nations? I'm pretty
> sure that the nations ruleset contains techs the AI is supposed to go for.
> Exactly how this relates to the ai tech path I do not know.

When we've no strong need for anything, defaults are taken (aitech.c:275 | when
bored i'll do some test if it's used anytime at all, it looks to me it isn't).
The need depends on buildings we want, units we want, governments we want
(aicity.c:141.. yes, i wouldn't expect it *there*.. oh well), and number of
techs depending on this one (aitech.c:171).

> > > Fixing the production issue, the AI badly needs more science. That means
> > > fixing ai_eval_governments to actually work. That means writing a
> > > happiness manager for  the AI. Building order for improvements, that
> > > means fixing the priority overrides for military units. Military units
> > > should not get priority over wonders of the world or temples, or settlers
> > > at times. This is a very scary list.
> > 
> > Cutting these out from Ross' corecleanups would be worthy. I plan do it
> > after some more cleanups... (basically I now plan another path for that
> > common formula, then cleaning up one other not-very-nice military function
> > and then cleaning up parts touched by Ross' cleanup)
> 
> Just ask Ross to do that. He'd know the corecleanups better than anyone else.

I'm not sure whether he's willing to. Ross? ;)

> > > I believe that there is one quick fix solution. Come up with a minimal
> > > diplomacy model to allow the AI to trade techs. That will stop the AI
> > > from being so badly behind in technology.
> > 
> > If we are going to do it, we should to it properly. No quick hacks and
> > quick fixes, please.
> > 
> 
> The AI trading techs with other countries would not be easy. I do not feel
> like trying to work out when the ai should pay tribute, when it should kowtow
> to its neighours etc. Have a look at the lack of diplomacy code. It's a
> tremendous mess.

The lack of some code is a mess?

> > And, then I won't be able to win against AI! :) (I'm relatively bad freeciv
> > player)
> > 
> 
> Yes you would. You'd just have to trade techs as well. In fact this would
> allow a trader style of play. You research techs that Civ 1 does not have, in
> order to gain a tech that Civ 2 does not have. You then trade that tech to
> Civ 3, and you are now 3 techs ahead, with a 2 tech lead on the AI civs.
> 
> It might mean an alternative to war. 

Oh well, but I would lose anyway ;-).

-- 

                                Petr "Pasky" Baudis

* elinks maintainer                * IPv6 guy (XS26 co-coordinator)
* IRCnet operator                  * FreeCiv AI hacker
.
No one can feel as helpless as the owner of a sick goldfish.
.
Public PGP key && geekcode && homepage: http://pasky.ji.cz/~pasky/