What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
-
- Dragoon
- Posts: 486
- Joined: Feb 16, 2015
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
I think that this questions could equivalently be what strategy would you use if you knew you were going to have perfect strategy and macro? That is obviously impossible but a good proxy would be playing at a super slow game speed (like the actual slow game speed but even 1/10 as fast as that). If every second you could re task every single unit what would you do?
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
I'd imagine it'll turn out that there is an optimal way to play a match up, and that the computer will scout perfectly at the exact timings, gather the perfect intel and then perfectly adapt the build to a build that is always a winning build order. That is, to some extend, how the pros play right now. It's just going to be the case that this perfect computer will always do the perfect strategy and will never fuck up.
Micro and macro wise there's a lot to gain. Even H2Os mechanics are pretty sloppy when held up against perfection. I would honestly guess that the computer could leverage units like skirms and goons the most. Think about hand cav for example: An important part of it beating skirms is that they snare and also force a large part of the skirms in hand attack that way. When the AI's group of skirms is getting caught by hand cav, it will instantly retask all skirms that arent being attacked to move away, thus those wont be snared at all, whereas human players just keep moving them as a group. It will also split skirms perfectly so that many of them are still firing in ranged mode and the hussars have a lot of distance to cover. In that sense, I think skirms would be the dominant unit type.
Micro and macro wise there's a lot to gain. Even H2Os mechanics are pretty sloppy when held up against perfection. I would honestly guess that the computer could leverage units like skirms and goons the most. Think about hand cav for example: An important part of it beating skirms is that they snare and also force a large part of the skirms in hand attack that way. When the AI's group of skirms is getting caught by hand cav, it will instantly retask all skirms that arent being attacked to move away, thus those wont be snared at all, whereas human players just keep moving them as a group. It will also split skirms perfectly so that many of them are still firing in ranged mode and the hussars have a lot of distance to cover. In that sense, I think skirms would be the dominant unit type.
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
pecelot wrote:Can somebody tell me the outcome of AI v AI clash in chess? I'm fairly certain it would be played in a very similar way...
Ye it is pretty much the same thing. The only difference is that AOE3 is not a game of perfect information so the AI must be programmed to scout frequently.
In general the way it gets programmed to understand strategic concept is key. All the part regarding mechanics is easy to figure out.
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
@ovi12
, well, I had mirrors in mind, they have a potential to be infinitely long. I guess non-mirror MU would be good indications of civilisations' maximum potential. This data therefore would in my opinion be very useful in terms of balance in the game.ovi12 wrote:notification
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
I dont think scouting is hard to the extend that an AI can't gather enough information to adapt to the problematic builds it can face. Maybe if you do some weird build an AI can sometimes not scout it, but then the AI would be capable of holding it easily because its countered super easily. Some perfect AI is so much better than we are and the good players here usually know almost exactly what is going on.
To add to skirms being a much better unit, pikes also have a huge skill gap because perfect cover mode usage would make that unit so efficient. Maybe a civ like Dutch would be insane in the hands of the AI.
To add to skirms being a much better unit, pikes also have a huge skill gap because perfect cover mode usage would make that unit so efficient. Maybe a civ like Dutch would be insane in the hands of the AI.
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Jerom wrote:I dont think scouting is hard to the extend that an AI can't gather enough information to adapt to the problematic builds it can face. Maybe if you do some weird build an AI can sometimes not scout it, but then the AI would be capable of holding it easily because its countered super easily. Some perfect AI is so much better than we are and the good players here usually know almost exactly what is going on.
To add to skirms being a much better unit, pikes also have a huge skill gap because perfect cover mode usage would make that unit so efficient. Maybe a civ like Dutch would be insane in the hands of the AI.
Maybe vs a human pikes would be good but i think pike in cover mode gets killed by cav, so maybe the computer would attack the pike with a ranged and a mele attack at the exact same time
last time i cryed was because i stood on Lego
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Im assuming cav sucks the better people get so..
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Maybe when doing a really weird build against the AI you could try to counteract his scouting by positioning units or a fb somewhere where nobody would scout normally and surprise them. Or hide your units or your fb at the border of the map, so when the AI scouts your base he things you're doing a straight ff and walks into your trap. But I don't think that if the AI were able to read the scoreboard perfectly nothing would surprise him because he knows exactly that when doing a naked ff your score should've dropped at some point, meaning you didn't invest in the age up.
I think it's also important for the computer to know commonly played strategies among the ranks of his opponent, so if the AI plays against a weaker opponent they would prepare for a different variety of strategies and wouldn't expect perfect play scores and when playing against high ranked opponents they can expect a good scouting pattern and a standard build. Like when a treasure got stolen from H2o he said that the explorer shouldn't have been there, meaning he expected his opponent to do a "better" scouting pattern when actually the enemy explorer just walked in a straight line and found an opportunity to steal a treasure.
I think it's also important for the computer to know commonly played strategies among the ranks of his opponent, so if the AI plays against a weaker opponent they would prepare for a different variety of strategies and wouldn't expect perfect play scores and when playing against high ranked opponents they can expect a good scouting pattern and a standard build. Like when a treasure got stolen from H2o he said that the explorer shouldn't have been there, meaning he expected his opponent to do a "better" scouting pattern when actually the enemy explorer just walked in a straight line and found an opportunity to steal a treasure.
Don't let the things you can't change dictate your life.
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Yep coding the decision making engine that decides what the opponent is doing and what it will have is cool. The hard part is applying the AI to be more aggressive. Usually AI is defensive.
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
You certainly haven't tried playing against a 100% handicap expert AI, sir!
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Every non-mirror would have an aggressor and a defender, where the civ with the better scaling defends. The aggressor would be putting on pressure almost constantly which makes aging up to fortress tough for the defender. The aggressor could age, in which case the defender would probably follow them up. We would likely see 100% RI compositions because it's just not worth it to make any other unit.
Brits would probably be top civ.
Obviously it would demolish any of us easily.
Brits would probably be top civ.
Obviously it would demolish any of us easily.
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Goodspeed wrote:Every non-mirror would have an aggressor and a defender, where the civ with the better scaling defends. The aggressor would be putting on pressure almost constantly which makes aging up to fortress tough for the defender. The aggressor could age, in which case the defender would probably follow them up. We would likely see 100% RI compositions because it's just not worth it to make any other unit.
Brits would probably be top civ.
Obviously it would demolish any of us easily.
Longbows seem like a unit thats hard to abuse using OP micro tbh.
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
I think when the longbow loses it's target when it dies he has to find a new target, during that time the longbow does not have the faster rate of fire. That's why spliting fire with longbowmen is beneficial: The damage output of the enemy isn't decreasing fast by for example 2 units dying instantly, but by 6 dying a bit later due to split longbowmen fire. This way there is a balance to be found between maximal damage output (only 1 lb on 1 target if possible = during a longer time period faster ROF) and hostile damage decrease (more longbowmen targeting the same unit so it dies faster than usual and deals less damage to your units).
Depending on how high the hitpoints of the opposing units are I think a good distribution would be 5 longbowmen on one target, which can't be done fast enough manually. In this aspect there also is something to abuse with perfect micro.
Depending on how high the hitpoints of the opposing units are I think a good distribution would be 5 longbowmen on one target, which can't be done fast enough manually. In this aspect there also is something to abuse with perfect micro.
Don't let the things you can't change dictate your life.
-
- Lancer
- Posts: 874
- Joined: Mar 20, 2015
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
all i know is i fucking hate when the AI gets bonuses rather than getting smarter. thats not a fun game for me. I refuse to play any computer game on a difficulty where the AI just gets free resources and other such bonuses rather than actually getting smarter. For example right now i play civ 5 single player a lot. I refuse to play above standard difficulty even though I can win nearly every time with ease because the only thing it changes is how aggressive the AI is and how many free things they get...stupid. What a cop out game makers...what a cop out.
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Lol making a good RTS AI would be harder than making the RTS itself.What a cop out game makers...what a cop out.
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 13004
- Joined: Apr 28, 2020
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Ofc, but theyre not even trying. If anything theyre making things easier these days
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 10278
- Joined: Jun 6, 2015
- Location: Paris
- GameRanger ID: 5529322
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Goodspeed wrote:We would likely see 100% RI compositions because it's just not worth it to make any other unit.
Well even if the comp is a perfect player, he won't be able to know what you're doing without scouting (and his opponent, being a comp too, wouldn't let him scout too much). So he would still have to mix anti cav because a big cav switch would beat his 100% ri. I think they would actually go for more cav, because cav is mobile and the only thing you can abuse vs perfect players (as Mitoe said) is the lack of info due to imperfect scouting, which you can abuse more with cav since you're more mobile and can harass the opponent from all sides.
Jerom wrote:Longbows seem like a unit thats hard to abuse using OP micro tbh.
With op micro, longbows would be one of the best (if the not the best) units of aoe lol. Perfect computer micro would mean you wouldn't ever let them reset their shooting animation, which mean they would basically have 34 attack. It's just amazing.
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Cav is overpriced becaue it incorporates raid potential and other stuff related to human inefficiency. Ranged units > melee units when the AI can micro perfectly.
- vaso413
- Crossbow
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Apr 23, 2016
- ESO: maxence69670
- Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
ovi12 wrote:Garja wrote:Ye I think that with perfect play (and perhaps perfect knowledge which is the limiting thing) the rush wins.
But the other comp can just do the same BO or slightly greedier as the rush but win with defenders advantage. Also the comp wouldnt have perfect knowledge, itd still have to scout.What do you think wpuld make the comp so much better at rushing than a human? The micro? The quick decisions?
I saw the same topic in the CS:GO subreddit, and the same thing applies here: AI will look for the fastest way to kill you(actually only that applies to CS:GO aswell, along with the decision-making), even if it means sacrificing an army. Their decision-making will be instant(bc of perfect mechanics) and they will move all units(unless they are charging your army or base) separately(e.g. vills, kiting/running away soldiers), making micro importance even greater. And, at the end of the day, you're inevitebly going to get tired of micro/macro-ing while they still keep up the same level of play.
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Kaiserklein wrote:With op micro, longbows would be one of the best (if the not the best) units of aoe lol. Perfect computer micro would mean you wouldn't ever let them reset their shooting animation, which mean they would basically have 34 attack. It's just amazing.
I don't think it's true. Whenever a Longbowman's target is changed manually, they have that longer animation — every time a Longbowman changes their target automatically (after a targeted unit died), they fire that „invisible" shot that deals no damage. In conclusion, you can't micro them perfectly without having their „reload" animations.
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 10278
- Joined: Jun 6, 2015
- Location: Paris
- GameRanger ID: 5529322
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Garja wrote:Cav is overpriced becaue it incorporates raid potential and other stuff related to human inefficiency. Ranged units > melee units when the AI can micro perfectly.
Lol cav still > RI so if he goes full RI he just loses to cav obviously...
pecelot wrote:Kaiserklein wrote:With op micro, longbows would be one of the best (if the not the best) units of aoe lol. Perfect computer micro would mean you wouldn't ever let them reset their shooting animation, which mean they would basically have 34 attack. It's just amazing.
I don't think it's true. Whenever a Longbowman's target is changed manually, they have that longer animation — every time a Longbowman changes their target automatically (after a targeted unit died), they fire that „invisible" shot that deals no damage. In conclusion, you can't micro them perfectly without having their „reload" animations.
No, if you click at the right time the animation isn't reset. Even I can do that, you just have to click slightly after the arrow reached its target, and the animation doesn't reset. But I can't do that and also split all lbs perfectly to have minimum overkill and maximum kills each shot. A comp would do that though, and so he would have 34 attack lbs.
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
It is not going full RI. He will go mostly for muskets if possible and when available it will go for a strong RI (yumi, maces, lbows, etc.) + a minimal amount of anticav to protect them and to stop raids.
The countersystem is not a perfect cycle in most MUs.
That is if the AI is taught well. A lot, if not everything, depends on how aknowledge the AI gets. Just like with chess AIs, etc.
The countersystem is not a perfect cycle in most MUs.
That is if the AI is taught well. A lot, if not everything, depends on how aknowledge the AI gets. Just like with chess AIs, etc.
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Argue why musks beat other RI? Or is this just another universal garja truth?
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
It is not secret that musks sort of break the counter system in this game especially for their cost. Good stats, mobility and siege pontetial just make them better. That's why most games used to be musk wars. I mean it's not even me saying that, just ask anyone good and he will agree. On top of that I just said that it will go for strong RI if it can.
Re: What would the meta look like if we had a smart AI with perfect mechanics?
Can you explain how musks would be any efficient against perfectly microd crossbows?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests