Ben80
Auto-translated
Again, there's no need to confuse two different things. Indeed, the original idea behind the classic games was player versus AI, playing through campaigns, etc. But a 1v1 game is a battle between people; let it remain that way, and the computer should play the role of an extra character.
I believe that’s not entirely correct. The original concept also included humans playing against each other with AI participation, which makes the game completely different.
And I am talking about battles between people. It's just that in this case, computers should be considered as a feature of the map.
Come on, you have to admit how absurd your paragraph sounds. "The Heroic Corner Archive"!!! If I remember correctly, this site existed from around 2002-2005. Back then, online gaming was at a fundamentally different level. Fifteen years have passed, hello! Diplomacy really struck a chord with me, and I want to discuss it in more detail.
Well, that's what I'm saying: if people are unwilling to understand each other and assume they don't know anything, then those kinds of conversations and answers will result.
It seems like everywhere I try to clarify that I'm talking about conditions where there is a balance of power between human and AI players. And back then, that was often the case.
Players have become stronger since then – it makes sense to improve the AI players too.
We started testing AI features with Lider1 a few months ago, and he had great enthusiasm, unlike LuckyF, for example.
Unfortunately, he disappeared almost immediately, and clearly not because the AI development wasn’t going well. He was last active on the forum at the end of March - has something happened to him?
Added 2 minutes ago
Can you give a couple of examples of when a weak player or a Novichok came up with some new idea? (not just from the 18th or 19th century). It would be very interesting. Also, I would like to know which options are named after beginners. Maybe there are some serious books written by first-category or candidate masters. This relates to the question of game strength and understanding. As a chess player, I am very interested in this.
But I'm really not interested in what beginners came up with, because I clearly wrote about players of average skill.
Old Candidate Masters aren't weak players. Just off the top of my head – Zak wrote interestingly.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%97%D0%B0%D0%BA,_%D0%92%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%80_%D0%93%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%8C%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87
Arkady Arkanov
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D1%80%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2,_%D0%90%D1%80%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%9C%D0%B8%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87
Added 12 minutes ago
As for "putting the AI in more favorable conditions," we've already gone through that stage too. Take a look at THIS thread. A template was created with unrealistically strong armies for the computers. But this idea only lasted once; no one wanted to play like that again. There are great single-player maps for fighting against computers.
Well, it is much better to improve the AI itself, and putting them in advantageous positions is just a temporary solution.
Another example showing that you think using old stereotypes. The possibilities for modding have greatly increased recently – 1) thanks to Baratortch and his patcher, 2) thanks to the presence of a community of modders who are willing to share their experience.
Take HW Rulez, which is full of flaws. They were invented when it wasn’t possible to programmatically correct certain things as easily as it can be done today.
But now - it is possible, and HW Rulez is an outdated thing. And you keep clinging to the past.
Hey! The world has changed.