NOAI Assembly...

has officially changed their name today in the Precinct 15 courthouse this morning in Bethesda, Maryland. Precipitating the change, lawyers for Creative Assembly strongly advised management to change its name from Creative Assembly to NOIA Assembly in order to avoid any and all future litigation associated with a class action misrepresentation lawsuit.
 
Upon leaving the courthouse, lawyers for NOAI Assembly were asked point blank from one field reporter if this "change was the direct result of their gaming public being so outraged at the complete lack of a competent computer controlled opponent in Empire:Total War, in particular, that there was never any sea based invasions by the A.I. even after several 'suppossed' improved gameplay patches"?   
 
Interestingly, the lawyers for NOAI Assembly initially avoided the question all together. And then meekly, almost inaudibly, as the crowd was dispersing, a junior lawyer in the background could be heard to say, "ask the Art Department, they are in charge of the computer design and development against a human opponent."

It is better to die by a swords quick thrust than to be impaled for a lifetime upon the sharp tongue of a woman.
-Grim Jack

Not having a decent AI is a game feature aimed at the bovine herd of semi-sentient American gamers.

At least according to CA.

Which is genius level creative spin

Don't Care What The Governments Say
They're All Bought And Paid For Anyway

Sun Green

boring, same old posts

I like it! Now that's 'Creative' purplehelmet. {g}

A.I. production-it's more like, Okay, the games about ready--lets stick some A.I. in- you have 3 weeks.

FlickJax


boring, same old posts

He's right.
 
I was bored.

It is better to die by a swords quick thrust than to be impaled for a lifetime upon the sharp tongue of a woman.
-Grim Jack

Jesus666


Not having a decent AI is a game feature aimed at the bovine herd of semi-sentient American gamers.

At least according to CA.

Which is genius level creative spin

I guess I must fall into that category then - playing as Poland with 1.5 and IS 2.1 installed I am getting my head handed to me on a silver platter.  England and Prussia are unified in hating me and have determined to rid me from the world- something they look likely to achieve as they have both laughed at my offers of peace - something I would have done to.

^Don't worry Ross...playing as Prussia I was defeated handily by a combined alliance of about seven Central European nations by the year 1740. This was with patch 1.3 IIRC and IS 2.0.

Just remember kids, when you need something wholesome and innocent like Sesame Street twisted into something sick and perverted - I'm just a phone call away.

-HR

Ha - I dream of 1740!  I doubt I will see past 1725 if memory serves

I guess the one thing that saves me is I'm from England so I guess by definition I can't be a semi sentient American gamer

Gusington


^Don't worry Ross...playing as Prussia I was defeated handily by a combined alliance of about seven Central European nations by the year 1740. This was with patch 1.3 IIRC and IS 2.0.

That's not exactly the ai beating you though Gus it's how they programmed the handicap the ai's get. An 8 year old could beat you with unlimited resources and unlimited men while they dwindle your resources down to nothing. I'm in the same boat playing Prussia. I haven't lost but one battle, yet I'm losing the war because of attrition to my resources that I can't afford to replace every GD turn. That's not good ai programming it's just cheating in a nutshell. They went from bad to worse no ai to a relentless cheating ai.
 
  I don't mind a cheating ai as long as it's not impossible to go up against. It takes every coin I make just to maintain the army I need to stop them from taking my cities. I can't stop them from taking my resources though every turn and I can't fix everyone they take every turn either. Thus I can't even afford to upgrade or get my populations to grow thus I have no chance as eventually the funds will run out and I won't then be able to even afford to upkeep my army. Plus when you have 4+ unlimited resources and unlimited army upkeep ai's coming at you every turn it's pretty hopeless as Prussia. {g}
 
The battle ai is horrible. But, once again with unlimited resources and men they can just keep coming turn after turn without worry it's like the potato chip commercial "eat all you want we'll just make more".
 
So, I guess if you like a game where the ai gets all the troups it wants every turn and all the resources it needs every turn to rebuild everything you captured or burnt to the ground you'll love this ETW game and ai.
 
I must say though it is a real challenge just to see how long you can last before the end comes. But, that doesn't necessarily mean it's fun doing so.

A.I. production-it's more like, Okay, the games about ready--lets stick some A.I. in- you have 3 weeks.

A question for the programming experts. Is hiring one programmer full-time for the duration of the game development (2 years?) enough to produce a good AI? Let's say you hire 1 full-time programmer for the Tactical battle AI and one for the rest of the AI (strategic, diplomacy).

I'm guessing it would cost 150 000 dollars per year for those 2 programmers, or 300 000 dollars for the development cycle of 2 years. Surely a big company can afford 300 000 when they sell over a million copies per title. Maybe the next CA title will have fixed this issue.

That's a great question.  I don't know the answer to it, but I suspect it's relative.  AI seems to be one of those things that's easy to underestimate the complexity.

Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.     - Albert Einstein

Xzar


A question for the programming experts. Is hiring one programmer full-time for the duration of the game development (2 years?) enough to produce a good AI? Let's say you hire 1 full-time programmer for the Tactical battle AI and one for the rest of the AI (strategic, diplomacy).

I'm guessing it would cost 150 000 dollars per year for those 2 programmers, or 300 000 dollars for the development cycle of 2 years. Surely a big company can afford 300 000 when they sell over a million copies per title. Maybe the next CA title will have fixed this issue.

However, you already hit on the reason why it's an afterthought...they're already releasing hit games without spending that money.

People with intelligence will use it to fashion things both true and false to try to push through whatever they want with their clever reasoning. This is injury from intelligence.
Nothing you do will have effect if you do not use truth.

Xzar


A question for the programming experts. Is hiring one programmer full-time for the duration of the game development (2 years?) enough to produce a good AI? Let's say you hire 1 full-time programmer for the Tactical battle AI and one for the rest of the AI (strategic, diplomacy).

I'm guessing it would cost 150 000 dollars per year for those 2 programmers, or 300 000 dollars for the development cycle of 2 years. Surely a big company can afford 300 000 when they sell over a million copies per title. Maybe the next CA title will have fixed this issue.

You are assuming a novice code monkey would be up to the task.  An AI specialist likely would command much more than that (remember, their salary is probably only 50% of the book-cost when you add in overhead like taxes, benefits, workspace, etc.).  And that is assuming you could get an AI specialist interested in working in the gaming industry. 

And to what end?  The market has not proven that better AI adds any value whatsoever to the game.  The lunatic fringe (ie, us) would prefer it otherwise, but we make up a negligible portion of the market.  The niches where we have some influence do not have the resources to develop and test a high-end AI. 

The only way to get less stupid AI is to stop stupid people from buying bad games in the first place.  Good luck with that.