Author Topic: AI and Roleplay  (Read 483 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 7738
  • Thanked: 3768 times
    • http://www.starfireassistant.com
AI and Roleplay
« on: July 13, 2019, 06:31:00 PM »
I'm catching up with the discord and I've seen a few posts relating to concerns I might dumb down the AI because its too good to allow me to 'role-play' :)

Firstly, I do believe the AI is a lot better than C# but my player-AI battles haven't been that extensive, so its early to make any definitive estimate on how much better. I am sure it will still do dumb things that I will have to fix after V1.0. Secondly, the whole point of my AI work is to make the game more interesting for single-player-race games (as opposed to me controlling several factions), so I will be trying my best to make the AI as capable as possible.

Based on the comments I have read, there seems to be some confusion about what I mean by 'role-play'. Role-playing isn't the opposite of optimisation. Role-playing doesn't mean deliberately designing terrible ships and therefore requiring a dumb AI to beat. Role-playing means starting with a general theme for your race, which might result in terrible ships, depending on how the theme affects design, but could also result in reasonable ones too. Future ship designs are based on the experience gained by that race in the game. To make that work you have to ignore your own knowledge and instead design ships based only on the knowledge-base of the race you are role-playing. That knowledge-base only changes when the race learns from experience in the game. It also means charging out into the galaxy before you are ready and losing ships to higher tech NPR enemies. I realise from many years of debates on these lines that this concept is completely alien to some players, who cannot understand why anyone would not simply use their own knowledge and experience to design the most effective ships they can. Despite that, I thought it was worth explaining even if my motivations seem strange to some players.

However, my focus on role-playing doesn't mean I am not interested in balance. I strive to make sure different weapons and other systems offer real choices. In my previous post about the changes to mesons being relating to campaign play, I was referring mainly to the effect on NPRs. Mesons were overpowered against NPRs, so I never used them. It made life too easy. That is why they were changed. Players are far better at designing ships to combat a specific threat, such as mesons, so the balance was different for human vs human. However, I am designing for human vs NPR play so weapons are balanced against likely NPR designs, not all potential player designs. BTW please don't take this as a signal I am re-opening the meson debate. I am just trying to address some misconceptions being debated on the discord :)

 

Offline Kristover

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • K
  • Posts: 18
  • Thanked: 5 times
Re: AI and Roleplay
« Reply #1 on: July 13, 2019, 08:53:29 PM »
I tend to tackle role play as world building in the sense of a game like City:Skylines....Aurora gives me a toolbox to live a very specific military science fiction fantasy.  I create military organizational tables which makes sense, promotion and rotational schemes which make sense, and accept playing sub-optimally conducive with the ground rules I set up.  For instance, prior to the first contact - I don't build warships.  Why would a unified nation who is going to the stars build a large and expensive space navy when there isn't anyone to fight?  For sure I'm building weapons and arming ships but the focus is on creating exploration, science, and utility ships.  I think I mentioned it earlier, I get a lot of enjoyment out of looking at the traits of individual commanders and imagining how that translates into crew dynamics.  Bottom line - Aurora 4x the space combat game is certainly interesting and but not so revolutionary that I couldn't get that fix elsewhere.  Aurora 4x the science fiction military RPG/builder/sandbox is WAY more interesting and how I derive my enjoyment.
 
The following users thanked this post: Jorgen_CAB, Mastik, Kytuzian, Kiri

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • J
  • Posts: 1008
  • Thanked: 77 times
Re: AI and Roleplay
« Reply #2 on: July 14, 2019, 06:09:25 AM »
I tend to tackle role play as world building in the sense of a game like City:Skylines....Aurora gives me a toolbox to live a very specific military science fiction fantasy.  I create military organizational tables which makes sense, promotion and rotational schemes which make sense, and accept playing sub-optimally conducive with the ground rules I set up.  For instance, prior to the first contact - I don't build warships.  Why would a unified nation who is going to the stars build a large and expensive space navy when there isn't anyone to fight?  For sure I'm building weapons and arming ships but the focus is on creating exploration, science, and utility ships.  I think I mentioned it earlier, I get a lot of enjoyment out of looking at the traits of individual commanders and imagining how that translates into crew dynamics.  Bottom line - Aurora 4x the space combat game is certainly interesting and but not so revolutionary that I couldn't get that fix elsewhere.  Aurora 4x the science fiction military RPG/builder/sandbox is WAY more interesting and how I derive my enjoyment.

Yes... this is pretty much how I approach single player mode of Aurora 4x as well. Military ships before there are anyone to actually fight are basically some policing force at best. I don't withhold exploration because it can be dangerous, the people living in that world don't know that it can be dangerous. Character traits are interesting because it can lead to interesting political conflicts and odd (or realistic) decision making.

The game work allot better (in my opinion) if you do roleplay which as Steve explains is that you only use the knowledge the people or societies knows about in game and you don't bring your own accumulated knowledge about game mechanics and previous games into the picture.

There are no contest (victory conditions or multiplayer) in Aurora 4x anyway and beating a scripted AI are not really much of an accomplishment in general anyway. Multiplayer in the game also seem to be best used as role-play in my opinion as the game are not really that well balanced for player versus player gameplay. As Steve said, game balance are more about AI NPR versus player which I'm fine with.

It is always good to discus balance in the form of choices. The more choices the better in my opinion, even if the choice is between two bad options.

With that said there is nothing wrong with treating the game as a contest and something you need to do better for every time you play it. That is a perfectly viable way to play and enjoy the game as well, not just my cup of tea in relation to this specific game. I treat different games differently but whenever there are role-play possibilities that is what I enjoy the most.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2019, 07:11:10 AM by Jorgen_CAB »
 
The following users thanked this post: Kristover, Mastik, lordcirth

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55