Humanlike AI

[Bugnr01]

Is it possible, maybe as a dlc, to get a humanlike playing AI.
Just want know what do you think about it!

Paradox could collect data from human players and use it for ai updates.
For a german as an example, tracking the construction lines, decisions and battle plans (barabarossa) with the kind and amount of units from human players.
Then analysing the success (territory gain, casualties) and using the most successfull ways to play for skripting the the AI a little bit.
So the AI should be more gamey and challenging, but less historically because people dont play hisorically.

I would like this as a dlc (to but it on and of and because the data collection and analysing will cost money).

Do you think it could work?
What do you think, would you like something like that?
Would it be ok for you if your games will be watched and analysed by a server?
Would you pay for something like that?

 

[Hans_Schnitzel]

The problem is that the AI cannot follow a player's path that easily, since the player had to react to something. The AI in HoI4 is supposed to be less scripted but more reactive, so that it does things that are best for its current situation, not something someone else has done before (historically) or something that the devs scripted into them.

I mean, imagine the player the AI is trying to imitate allied France, then went for the UK or something, but in the actual game the player (playing Spain, or whatever) allied France himself, France allied with the UK and the AI that focused on a navy and airforce attacks the UK, and gets eaten up by the French Army. Okay, bad example, but I hope it helps understand my concern.

 

[Gamer_1745]

Not sure if it can be done?

See my ideas that I talked about here: Link, Link & link

Maybe add in a feature that after 3 hours of play the Human like AI just takes a break!

 

[Uladh88]

its prob worth noting that AI - Artificial intelligence doesnt currently exist in the world its just lots of computer code trying to understand as many simulations that the programer can come up with

 

[Bluestreak2k5]

its prob worth noting that AI - Artificial intelligence doesnt currently exist in the world its just lots of computer code trying to understand as many simulations that the programer can come up with

I would highly disagree with that. Watson is currently being used to combat cancer and is supposed to be taking his Doctor certification exam this year to become a certified doctor. They even had to remove Urban Dictionary and block the website from his processor because he learned to curse at his developers.

And if you don't think computers are that capable, you should watch this:

 

[Beagá]

I think it´s highly arrogant to believe it´s impossible to have stuff smarter than us.

They might not believe in Jesus or Allah, however.

 

[tazaaron]

LOL

 

[Lech Kaczynski]

Can the humanlike AI talk trash to me during the game?

 

[Mabs]

yea
i want the AI to swear at me in pigeon english then rage quit half way through a game, exceptional idea

 

[Murmeldjuret]

I lowered your mothers firewall last night!

Jokes aside, there are many ways to do AI. Gathering data and crunching that alone has many ways of being done: Machine Learning

Doing user gathering for specific things does at some point react organically, it just has to, it even automagically tells which things are worth reacting so and so much to.
It's not like it would be something easy to do, and it would have to run for a long while without major patches (unlikely), so the idea is really good, but I don't think it would be easy to implement. Another problem is that the human has actions the AI hasn't (#yolo I have a save I want to see what happens) which will become outliers and tilt data away from optimum.

It is fully possible from vast data to group, patternize, and predict actions and know which responses does what, it just takes a lot of coding and data, and it will always get quirks, make mistakes, and not savescum/be forgiven. A rule of thumb is that the more advanced an AI gets, the more noticeable it is when it makes an AI only mistake.

One thing I as a computer scientist would like to see is some form of: Evolutionary Algorithm
In that the AI tries different things against different players and keeps the strategies that work, but now we are really getting into advanced stuff that would be costly to implement. So that the whole playerbase is continuously improving the AI.

 

[SteelVolt]

This comes up from time to time, and here is Wiz response to it (which i agree with): https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...bout-mimic-intelligence.833457/#post-18806920

All in all, even if it is possible to do and the kind of behaviour you describe is desirable, we are still in a place technologically and theoretically that the effort of building such a system is way harder and takes much more effort than having a coder build a tailored AI for the game and tweaking it based on feedback.

 

[cdub8d]

I would highly disagree with that. Watson is currently being used to combat cancer and is supposed to be taking his Doctor certification exam this year to become a certified doctor. They even had to remove Urban Dictionary and block the website from his processor because he learned to curse at his developers.

And if you don't think computers are that capable, you should watch this:

My calc teacher showed us this video in class and he was amazed. I have seen it a few times on different occasions and grey brings up many points that are really scary.

Can the humanlike AI talk trash to me during the game?

Oh man could you imagine the rage on the forums? And thay is exactly why we need that feature.

 

[henzington]

No thanks on the human like ai I prefer to delay the eventually robot uprising as long as possible.

 

[Central]

Even if this is a joke. I really want at least the option for a historic AI, because i personally want to play historically... at least until a certain point in history

And if i want to play against humas who can fuck up the game by 36, i just enter a pulic game.

 

[VampiRos]

you want human AI? play Multiplayer

 

[Bap]

Kind of disappointed to hear Paradox`s stance on this subject.
For me AI failures and predictability has made HOI3 virtually unplayable. And I think I am not alone when I say that nowadays a good AI is the most important thing for me in a strategy game.
The writing is on the wall for where this is going to go, just take a look at AI-only playthroughs trend or to google`s Deepmind AI.
But if you don`t want to invest in this area, at least make an AI that is more easily accessed, tweaked and modded by the players, the community-input alone could take it to much higher levels.
As I understand it the learning-approach-AI could be implemented from the outside, it doesn`t have to be written inside the game code. It just requires the AI code to be easily tweaked.
I remember an experiment with genetic algorithms being applied to Civ4 AI by some modder (Big Apple) with help from the community and this was like 10 years ago. The results might not have been brilliant but were definetely fascinating. Then there came the BetterAI mod, where some devoted modders (JDog2000) eliminated most of the bugs from the AI making for a much better playing experience and raising the equivalent difficulty level by a couple of notches.
Please Paradox, take AI more seriously and devote more resources to it.

 

[Mabs]

an AI will always be limited by its scope. a human can think on the fly. when an AI starts doing that, well,.. youve seen Terminator yes ?

the problem is people wont abide by their own rules, as they like to win.

if you play US, dont build anything until pearl harbour as you want to stay "neutral".. players will spam carriers to get tech up - of course you will win easily, cos youre meta-gaming.

and thats fine.

but dont use knowledge the AI doesnt have, to then say "oh its easy to beat"...
or look at BlackICE that has modifiers for HARD countries, so you can buff Japan, ok it is still predictable but that is offset by its 130% build capacity

its not ideal, but its as good as youre likely to get.

 

[Bap]

if you play US, dont build anything until pearl harbour as you want to stay "neutral".. players will spam carriers to get tech up - of course you will win easily, cos youre meta-gaming.

Or you could start in the 1941 scenario. Isn`t that what scenarios are good for?

 

[Bap]

but dont use knowledge the AI doesnt have, to then say "oh its easy to beat"...

Actually I was thinking more of the combat AI. This is what makes the game unplayable to me... And this is not even accessible or moddable in any way! Awfully broken and 100% under the hood.

 

[Mabs]

Or you could start in the 1941 scenario. Isn`t that what scenarios are good for?

yes unless you want to do something different, even if its not gamey - align to axis maybe ? /shrug

Actually I was thinking more of the combat AI. This is what makes the game unplayable to me... And this is not even accessible or moddable in any way! Awfully broken and 100% under the hood.

yeah fair enough. this came up in EU4 recently with the movement lock where people bait AI with small stacks etc, cant really win that one, if youre going to exploit it of course you get an advantage.

What main bit of combat AI though ? I know from experience the "front control" AI in HoI3 was severly stupid on many occasions