August 31, 2014 at 17:21 #117989
Throw Curse – I’ve never seen AI use it.
I probably should’ve taken “frequently” out of that sentence as they are used but not very often, which is more often than some.
I’ve seen it used once in a very specific situation, which could be me misremembering. In a siege where the orc priest can throw a curse onto an attacking unit but he cannot actually attack that unit, then I believe this is when the AI used it. If I can manage, I will try to test it at some point to see if I can recreate it.
Weakening touch I know for a fact is used since Blight Doctors in city sieges will use it with the bonus range.
I think only very rarely have I ever seen a storm sister run up and use stunning touch or a succubus use black curse when it was in range to seduce. That may just be due to some quirk of how I play (or failing memory 🙂 ).
As I mentioned above, Throw Curse seems to be low priority if it has any priority at all. I hope my memory is right and that some units use it occasionally, but I am sure the Seduce, Charm, Dominate, and Convert abilities take precedence over Throw Curse, especially in the case of the Succubus.
Also in ai if a unit can kill another unit with melee that unit will always do that even when it can kill it with a ranged shot( or two or after repositioning to set up a flanking attack) even when it is an archer/support.
I’ve found this behavior very strange, but is usually consistent in the sense that it only takes a single strike to kill the unit. I’d like to see if the AI still uses that strategy when there is a touch penalty like static shield or fearsome.
Disclaimer: Slight tangent and speculation to follow.
Humans use experience to make their decisions. For AIs there are 2 choices. Either program the experience in or simulate the combat and use that as experience.
You can also create a system that just seems intelligent but isn’t actually doing anything ‘intelligent’ instead of actually programming it to think logically like a human would. There’s the ants and pheromones example, but there was also another that simplifies it a bit and takes the living being out of the picture.
Consider a set of robots that set down on a planet with a ship and they to go out and collect certain minerals that appear in clumps around the planet. How do you efficiently collect them without random or relatively random walks? Leave a trail once you’ve found the minerals.
So they leave a marker every foot or so on their way back to the ship from the clump of minerals. When they get back to the ship, they follow a trail of markers to the clump of minerals again. But once the minerals are gone the trail is useless, so when the robot follows a trail anywhere, they pick up every second marker to remove the trail. This means that once the minerals are gone the robots will follow the trail, remove it and then wander around when the trail ends.
All of the behavior is not very intelligent on an individual level (wander, pick up minerals, return to ship, follow trail, etc.), but as a whole the entire system seems intelligent because a 3rd party observer can notice the efficiency of dropping a trail and removing it.
I think that this is primarily the type of behavior the tactical AI uses, but with a tad more intelligence for the individual. Most turns, the units will attempt to maximize their damage output and this sometimes results in intelligent behavior like multiple flanking attacks. Also the support units with Heal tend to always use it when they can.
There also is probably another layer that picks the optimal move order of the units and possibly tells them what attack they should use if it differs from the reactive choice. I’m pretty sure the units don’t take turns in the same order all the time, so there must be something else determining the order in certain situations to allow for multiple flanking attacks if the units need to do it in a certain order. This layer would definitely be more like a logical system than one that just seems intelligent through circumstance.August 31, 2014 at 21:08 #118036
AI is fine in battles where its gonna win anyway. battles with strength advantage and without walls have far less issues than any others.
ATM, pathing does not take into account units will move. This is most evidently when using tactical battle when capturing gold mines. Once a single infantry or pikeman blocks off the main path, the other one takes an detour, sometimes as far as 3 combat rounds if he’s want to rejoin the fight.
The AI should in cases like this just move the unit behind the first one, and remember to move the front unit first next round.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.