The latest in the classic Empire Series of games, which has spanned almost five decades. · By
You mean we could select bots reflecting generals like Patton, slapping soldiers and trash talking, ignoring orders and other behaviors which might effect the enemy's performance? Or a cautious general like Bradley, who would likely prefer patrols to wedge attacks? How is it some AI's cannot use all units? You might have to do a video seminar on this, Mark. Break it down so idiots like me can understand what I'm engaging when I select one.
How is it some AI's cannot use all units?
Well, first code has to be written to use the unit. If the AI player does not understand the function of a unit, it cannot use it. The brain must be developed.
This will actually be something Unit Set creators have to be aware of - that if they make a brand new unit - the AI will not understand it as a concept. A brand new unit is very different than just "making the tank faster/tougher".
The only AI currently in the mix that is capable of understanding something new would be the Enhanced AI. But even still you have to explain it in a script to him so that he understands what context he can use it in (define Rules of Engagement, is it good at exploring? do it reduce drain? etc.). It is all very involved actually. and the results are not always what you hope for.
Now the exciting thing is that the three existing AI's can be changed to understand more concepts. I would think the "Classic AI" would be pretty hard to modify, as there is some legacy with the way it is setup. If you wanted to add the concept of a Satellite and what to do with it, it could be done.
The "Expanding AI" is very minimalist in getting its job done - and it is quite effective imho. It can kick your ass if you make a wrong move. But I have kept it minimalist for a reason so that hopefully others can come in and add to it. It is not a very complex set of code for that reason.
AIs are very challenging. and it is hard to do and quite time consuming. If we have members of the community that are up to the challenge (and I know we do), we should all cheer them on.
No sure I follow the question, but Specialty Cities produce a particular specified unit type type of city faster, and others less than normal. The actual speed depends on the "Efficiency" of the city. So to get the specialty bonus that city must produce. Be aware that capturing a city also reduces the efficiency by 10%. The city not producing anything is how it regains efficiency.
I'm asking if a Specialty City, when I capture it, can be made able to produce the very same units produced by the enemy , using the enemy's former plants and equipment located there-- because of strategic bombing to preserve infrastructure! This provides a real incentive to capture certain cities over others! I guess I'm asking if there's a legacy value to capturing a Specialty City. A legacy game somehow informs current play with previous play history. Providing the concept of a Speciality City, you've already laid pipe for it, so it came to mind. All existing Efficiency rules can apply, even reduced efficiency of 10%, but perhaps restoring production of a unit the city was known for should provide a faster than usual ramp up in efficiency which makes such captures a real lure, not to mention a mine field and patrols for protection.
ah I see - There's no history of production when capturing a city. When you take a city, you review the production, but it is reset to nothing and you make adjustments from there. There's no bonus for producing what was produced before. So you don't get to piggy back on production time already spent. But if a city is marked as a specialty for a certain unit type, that specialty is not lost on capture. So you would still get the percentage advantage/disadvantage depending on what you decide to produce there.
