Hypothetical German 1 Move



  • @Lucifer:

    Avalon Hill?
    Whoever holds the copyrights.

    That’s sort of my point.  The people that hold the copyrights aren’t interested in making a computer game off it.  Think - the development cost will be far more than for Risk, or for Monopoly, because of the cost of writing the far more complex AI.  Plus Axis and Allies is less popular.

    It’s fully possible to make much better game than triplea.

    ZOMG U LIE! . . .

    Of COURSE it is possible to make it better, it’s just a question of who’s gonna pay for it.
    How much will it sell……I don’t know.
    I guess Halo 3, Civilization 8, sells better than A&A.

    Mmhmm.

    A&A is not completely different from chess. And chess is quite popular.
    Say there are about 700 chess player for every one Axis and Allies player.  That’s what makes them “completely different”; market size!
    I don’t know how many A&A players there are in the world.
    But if all are counted, also boardgamers, CD version from 98?, triplea, then I’m sure there’s big enough market to
    make it profitable.

    Hasbro so far has begged to differ.

    What we need is some kinda petition.

    (edited for colorz)


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    My tripleA supports LHTR, to some extent.  Dunno about yours.

    Anyway, you’ll never make an intelligent AI to play against.  Just give up on that.

    But making the variants should be simple enough, just expand upon Axis and Allies : Iron Blitz, try to iron out some of the errors, add the new maps, add the new units and sell it for $59.99.

    It’s easy money for the manufacturer’s since most of the code is already there.  You just need to copy paste some code, change some variables and design new maps.



  • If there was the possibility of selling an A&A videogame I think that Hasbro did not have lost it!

    AI is a challenge, the last years have seen great improvements, for example Deep Blue, one day we will have a AI player fro triple A that may defeat medium experienced player I think!



  • I would move normally, except that I would also take the Caucuses.
    I have only played on TripleA, so I can’t compare it with other ‘on line’ systems.
    Concerning the NA and tech advantages, it seems pretty clear that a nation can pretty well gear themselves to a victory with the right combination of advantages, if their opponent, (especially a newbee) fails to know just what the counter NA or techs  are.
      😄 I think I have a good solution, but wait  😉, I have to do my copyright first.
      I don’t mind sharing ideas with everyone, but when it comes to a lot of hard work by me and my partner, (my wife) well work should be compensated, play should be free. If anyone disagrees, then you probibly don’t understand the concept of free enterprise, supply and demand, and that the mother of invention is the need for something better.
    And besides, I am in dire need of some extra income.
      Anyway, I hope you will consider my project with an open mind.
      Respectfully,

    C.I. 😮



  • @Jennifer:

    My tripleA supports LHTR, to some extent.  Dunno about yours.

    In the latest tripleA version the LHTR is included.
    But u can’t land fighters on sz at end of turn and then move them to the newly built AC.
    And u can’t build fighters and place them on AC.
    LHTR, NA, is not supported by the current java version of tripleA.
    A lot of others stuff is also missing in the tripleA compared to rules, variants etc.

    I’m happy someone made the tripleA version so we all can play A&A against anyone who’s online, but it’s not like
    tripleA is “good enough” as it is now.
    This is the freeware cons and pros.
    It’s not for sure that even if Hasbro didn’t (yet) make a PC game of A&A with different versions it would not be profitable.
    We don’t know that before it’s done. And only then we would know if A&A PC game would sell big enough to pay for
    development costs. And it doesn’t have to include good AI, but then I would definately buy it and use it instead of tripleA.


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    @Romulus:

    AI is a challenge, the last years have seen great improvements, for example Deep Blue, one day we will have a AI player fro triple A that may defeat medium experienced player I think!

    I’d settle for an AI that can challenge my 4 year old. 🙂



  • Ok, I know that until the product it is not sold it is not possible to know how items many of them will be bought, but surveys and researchs on the market are a common business strategies, and Hasbro is quite good at marketing.

    Regarding AI in tripleA I agree with you Jennifer, it is like a children!
    Actually AI is a disciopline that is still growing, and have still to do a lot of improvement to achieve significative results, other than particulare application, but we can be sure that the in the future Computer will become more and more able at self-management and problem solving.


  • 2007 AAR League

    TripleA is just fine - why re-invent the wheel? It’ll be a lot easier to just add NA’s and LHTR than to build a whole new program.

    As for AI - I think this would be extremely difficult. Just curious - are there any other boardgames of similar complexity that have been made into computer versions with decent AI?

    In terms of complexity, A&A would be a lot harder to program than chess I think. You have:

    • 5 sides instead of 2 - you have to consider what four other powers will do in response to your move.
    • the problem of logistics
    • the outcome of battles is not predictable as in chess
    • the board layout is much more irregular than the square grid in chess
    • victory condition is much more complex
    • the decision of what units to buy doesn’t exist in chess
    • each turn you can move all your units, not just one.

    I guess you could make the AI base it’s calculations on No Luck outcomes



  • Frood, resolving all the issues you said are difficult. But, as I said, AI is a challenge, and is making progress every day.

    In videogame to have hard AI “players” usually they cheat. For example in Warcraft, Computer Players have advantages in collecting of money, so they are still stupid but have a lot of money and units!

    The best AI I have ever found in a Videogame, that is alsofamous for this reason, was in “Carriers at War” produced by SSG. (By the way in the last weeks Matrix Games website announced the release of the new version of Carrier at War that seems great).

    In that game the AI used some predefined strategy, that are casually selected and mixed up, and may also be changed to adapt to the game.

    Indeed, I think that the real improvement in Videogame AI will be when the “Strong AI Model”, will be used. The difference with the ordinary used “Weak Model” is that the AI Learn, and so it may become better at the game, the more games are played. So you do not need to create a perfect AI at start but you need an AI able to learn. No one game that I know have this feature, however.



  • P.S.

    The AI techniques and solving startegies are usually tested on game. Because games, in respect to the real world, allows for problem with well defined domains and goals but at same time are very complex having a lot of possible actions.



  • @Jennifer:

    Anyway, you’ll never make an intelligent AI to play against.  Just give up on that.

    NEVAR, u say?  Would you be willing to bet on that?

    The bet I have in mind involves Jen, a bikini, a small keg of rum, and a flame-resistant rubber chicken.

    Everyone else that wants in on the bet, wave your hand.



  • I can write a fairly good AI for Axis and Allies.  I can’t do it for chess tho.


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    @newpaintbrush:

    @Jennifer:

    Anyway, you’ll never make an intelligent AI to play against.  Just give up on that.

    NEVAR, u say?  Would you be willing to bet on that?

    The bet I have in mind involves Jen, a bikini, a small keg of rum, and a flame-resistant rubber chicken.

    Everyone else that wants in on the bet, wave your hand.

    See, the problem with this bet is simple, I’D WANT TO LOSE! 😛  Yes, I’m an attention whore, I know. 🙂

    Anyway, they have a CD-Rom they could adapt much more easily then TripleA to put new maps and new units in as well as LHTR and National Advantages.  They just have to do it.



  • @newpaintbrush:

    I can write a fairly good AI for Axis and Allies.  I can’t do it for chess tho.

    Then write the new AI for tripleA!


  • 2007 AAR League

    Why would you want Jen to mail you a drunk flaming rubber chicken in a bikini?



  • I guess i just have a dirty mind…  I saw something different 😛

    This coming from a guy who had a friend in the Army who talked about pyro-necro-sado-masochistic-bestiality.
    (beating the crap out of dead flaming animals for sexual pleasure).


  • 2007 AAR League

    @ncscswitch:

    I guess i just have a dirty mind…  I saw something different 😛

    This coming from a guy who had a friend in the Army who talked about pyro-necro-sado-masochistic-bestiality.
    (beating the crap out of dead flaming animals for sexual pleasure).

    WTF?!  :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:



  • @nuno:

    @Frood:

    I guess you could make the AI base it’s calculations on No Luck outcomes

    That would be a poor AI.

    Agree.
    It is not important on what kind of loss forecasting AI is based, it is important to have a solid planning module that may allow the AI to prepare and follow a soundly global plan/strategy.


  • 2007 AAR League

    Good point, I guess. Loss forecasting is only important in deciding where to attack and move/place your forces within the context of a single turn. The main challenge for the AI (at least the biggest issue for the present TripleA AI) is logistics and purchasing. The AI just keeps building Transports and never brings them back.



  • I think so. The loss forecasting may be used to assign units to the battles but the decision of where to attack should be made with a planning strategy.
    In TripleA it is not possible to make exhaustive search in the problem space, using fast forward planning techinques or backtracking strategies. So the only choice, IMHO, is to have high level strategic, logistic and purchasing modules that uses heuristic rules to define sounding strategies, different for each nations. For example, TRN buying may be “penalized” as action for Germany and Russia, have a decreasing bonus based on the TRN buyed for the other nations. I mean bonus and penalization to weight the buying actions.

    Another interesting point of AI, is the possibility to have the AI learning in each games, so adapting to the playing style and strategies of the player. Maybe one day someone will start this work on TripleA…


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Did it suit like a glove Imperious Leader?

    no but i think my comment is like ‘iron in the glove’ to you.


  • 2007 AAR League

    @Romulus:

    I think so. The loss forecasting may be used to assign units to the battles but the decision of where to attack should be made with a planning strategy.
    In TripleA it is not possible to make exhaustive search in the problem space, using fast forward planning techinques or backtracking strategies. So the only choice, IMHO, is to have high level strategic, logistic and purchasing modules that uses heuristic rules to define sounding strategies, different for each nations. For example, TRN buying may be “penalized” as action for Germany and Russia, have a decreasing bonus based on the TRN buyed for the other nations. I mean bonus and penalization to weight the buying actions.

    Another interesting point of AI, is the possibility to have the AI learning in each games, so adapting to the playing style and strategies of the player. Maybe one day someone will start this work on TripleA…

    I guess you’d want to set certain objectives, such as “Hold West Russia” or “Hold Egypt”, and territories with ICs should be defined as “defend at all costs”

    You seem to know a lot more about AI than I do, but here are some of the principles I would build in:

    Planning phase:

    Review board position and set certain “waypoints” - eg. should the US be sending units via Afria or Norway? Subsequent steps of the turn will be planned to advance units along this route. Identify where units are needed at the end of this turn, 1 turn from now, and maybe 2 turns from now.

    Part of this step would be to assess the defence of key territories: review the current defence of any territory with an IC in it, and the strength of any possible attacks against it, including 2-stage attacks (eg. what happens if UK attacks WE with everything, and US follows with another all-out attack?) - identify how many more Inf etc. needed to defend. If there are extra, these can be tagged as “surplus” to start moving toward the front.

    Essentially, this step determines where units are needed, and sets priorities on these needs.

    Purchase phase

    1st, decide what to build in mainland ICs.
    Then, with “offshore” ICs, figure out how many transports are in range, how many land units are already available for transport (allowing for what may be necessary to defend against potential attacks). Then purchase units / TRNs to maximize the number of land units that can be delivered next turn.

    Combat

    • identify territories that can be “traded” - taken lightly with air support

    • identify territories that can be taken solidly, safe from counter-attack

    • identify “cherries” - lone transports in range of air power, ICs without AAs in reach of SBRs, empty territories that can be tank-captured and evacuated.

    • determine whether trading units is advantageous or not - do you have the piece-count to support a war of attrition, or do you need to preserve units to wait for a better opportunity to strike?

    • calculate likely economic results of all potential battles, and value of units that would be left vulnerable afterwards. Find the most economically advantageous combination of battles.

    • Probably also some consideration to tactical issues, such as blocking tank blitzes etc.

    Non-combat movement / placement

    • review priorities identified at start of turn in light of combat results. move / place units to optimize balance between defending vital territories and advancing pressure against the enemy.

    Just some thoughts, not very complete though.



  • Yes, Frood, very good proposal.
    I know a little about AI, because I am starting to study Planning techniques, NEural Network and Genetic algorithm for m work. I am still studying and learning so I have still much to do!

    Your idea is interestiong because allow the AI to focus the evaluation on particular area. The power of the PC is the possibility to weigh and compare multiple options weighing. The more interestin thing is that different “abstract startegies” may be prepared, then selected randomly and finally “concretized” with optimization techinques.
    Conmcretrized means that an abstract strategy, a set of guidelines, is then completed with concrete purchasing choices, movements and combats to perform.

    Really, Frood you have give to me an idea that I will try to implement in my runnig project.
    One day, when I have more free time I will try to define the design of this AI.


  • 2007 AAR League

    I look forward to it! Let me know if I can help.



  • @Frood:

    Why would you want Jen to mail you a drunk flaming rubber chicken in a bikini?

    Hell, why WOULDN’T you?

    Well, some people are just weird.  :roll:


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 6
  • 5
  • 1
  • 4
  • 1
  • 15
  • 30
  • 1
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

50
Online

14.8k
Users

35.5k
Topics

1.4m
Posts