Command & Conquer

So for example when fighting this AI if you did 5 matches that you did a tank rush all 5 times the 6th time u tried a tank rush it would have a counter for your rush perpaired once it has seen your rush.

I like this idea. Sounds like it'd be a good AI for Generals 2.

There would need to be A LOT OF DATA COLLECTION to get this right, but could be interesting, but imo if you want to be challenged, find an online game with players similar to your skill.

That could possibly be avoided with an online database storing the information to a personal profile, then choosing to synch with this database whenever you wished to update your personal A.I. Although many people disliked the online all the time about C&C 4, having the online backup as an option along with a local network storage would allow for people to choose whether they did this or not.

With an online database full of personal A.I.'s, it could open up the possibility of downloading someone's personal A.I. and playing against a simulated version of a player, allowing for practice matches against top tier players to help improve your multiplayer skillset in online matches, or even practice against the simulated players for a tournament to help prepare for what the other players your up against will throw at you.

I c, but i don't think competitive players would like to share their play styles. They want their opponent to be surprised and wounder what they got up their sleeves.

If you know how a player usually plays before you actually play them, it gives you an extra advantage.

Not to mention the logistics, but it should be looked into never the less.

Agreed, it would require more resources, but tied to an EA account (like membership to this forum lets say) it really could be pulled off with reasonable pricing for data storage.

One more thing too, most top players have more than one strategy they can use for a faction, as most strats rely heavily on map specifics, a specific faction being used, and the faction being played against, so even with a simulated playstyle, a human opponent would only be able to prepare so much compared to the actual match.

It's like a football team preparing for the big game that week against a rival team, you may know what their playbook is, and run practices against an offense or defense with that in mind, but practice against your simulated team will not prepare you for any tricks that the other team has to offer, such as changing the play calls, swapping out players for other positions that they also know how to play, and taking into account that they were doing the same kind of practice against your playbook.

This idea really revolves around adding another aspect of multiplayer on a competitive level to help prepare players assume on a basic level of what to expect, rather than show them exactly what the player would do in a match.

One thing that could help is an option on their online profile to allow the sharing of their personal A.I., I.E. choosing whether to allow other players to download it or not.

Have you played Empire Earth ? That's what it does and the AI suck, it will COPY what ever you do, even using cheats, make an army used with cheats, IT WILL DAMN MAKE A BIGGER ONE ! I personally like the idea but if its like EE's ai, no thanks.

Empire Earth was a bad AI if copy you all the time. But not all AI will do that.

It is a great idea to have you own AI that learn from you but it would needed to have some training before you get to play with it.

The training would only be to make a AI to be a base level then it will learn ever else from you when you playing with it.

I would like to be able to save the AI on my own computer as wall as put on a online server for other to player with it.

It all could be done at low cost with Artificial neural network with Genetic algorithm / Evolutionary algorithm.

It would be norther like Empire Earth AI but would make the best AI in any of the RTS games.

Over time with could make AI that could win the games tournaments.

I don't think it would need to collect too much data. Just basic match data... like pretty much every other online game does nowadays.

For example, Halo collects data for not only you as an individual player, but also as a general whole per map. Things like heatmaps and locations where you die the most or get the most kills. Favorite weapons and average life are also factored in. Having these types of things collected for a C&C game really shouldn't be too challenging, right?

The AI would, for example, look at the heatmaps from previous matches and use that to determine the position you are most likely holding. It would notice a hot zone and do it's best to defend that area since you tend to pass through there the most while playing on that map.

And that's only one calculation that would be taken into consideration. There are also things like favorite units, number of units created vs number of units lost, number of orders given to a unit prior to an attack, etc. All of this could be used to formulate a challenging AI opponent for you to play against.

Actually the better idea would be called a "Mirror AI"...already in CnC3 and RA3...the AI does learn if you beat it the first go, the next mission on the same map...it will tromp you. (However, this is not persistent, because if you change maps or factions the AI resets, and the process restarts.)

However, a Mirror AI is better. It doesn't learn it copies, so lets say you use a particular tactic in game. Well during the game...the Combat AI is fighting...but a silent Mirror AI is watching your moves in Observer mode. The Mirror AI copies all movements, build que, and etc. And then next match subsitutes this build que setting you use as one of a multitude of new tactics for the Combat AI to use. So either the Combat AI will go counter, or it will mirror your earlier attack. This would allow the AI to be competitive and adaptive, and make it a more frustrating opponent. But not all AI's are perfect, if you play any game...there is a sweet spot...usually associated to the time played, which will create a fatal flaw in the AI's coding and allows you to go on the attack. If you play any RTS it takes alot of patience to find this sweet spot.

An example of a sweet spot is fighting for over 3 hours an Extreme AI on Company of Heroes, and the AI has almost total and complete map control. If you hold out, the AI begins to choke, and a gap opens up a narrow one at that...which you can exploit and then take back the map. Star Craft and Star Craft II...the supposedly "unbeatable" Extreme AI's probably have the same sweet spot. In RA3 the sweet spot is the 15minute mark...who ever is on the defense at the 15minute mark will survive and then crush his attacker. I did this in one game where my opponent in a 1v1 game had nearly 75% of all the land and had attacked me repeatedly and several times over had me up against the rocks. But the game lasted into 15minutes...and turned the tide...slowly but surely cutting away his power and forces. The match ended at 34 minutes...with a kill/death ratio of 2.95 for me. And I only had 24 units on the map.

Although, I personally would love to have a CnC game that gives you bonus awards for high kill/death ratios.

That wouldn't work too well, to be honest.

I mean, it would work in the first few moments of the match, but after that initial starting move, the AI wouldn't be able to defend itself. First of all, how would the mirror AI know how to distinguish the beginning of one of your attacks and the end of one? It can't because it doesn't know what you are thinking. All it would do is copy your movements and do it themselves... from the start of the match to the end.

However, the problem with copying your movement is that it leaves them more vulnerable to other types of attacks. If it tries to defend itself, then it would no longer be able to mirror your attack.

Think of it this way:
You're looking into a mirror back at yourself. You suddenly raise your fist and are about to punch your reflection. If the reflection is true, then it would copy exactly what you do regardless of what happens. However, what if just before you hit the mirror, your reflection dodged out of the way? Strange? Maybe, but that is what I'm getting at with the AI. The AI wouldn't be considered a mirrored attack anymore if you toss something new at it while it's executing its moves. If you change the scenario, it won't be able to mirror you and if it can't mirror you then the strength of the attack dramatically decreases. Thus, the AI would be much weaker and easier to defeat.

Well this is why its not a pure mirror AI...it copies all moves you have done in a series of games...and adds them to a combat AI. Meaning even if you change the scenario, the combat AI will have the counter plan in motion or available. So let's say you do the scenario change in a game now...the Mirror AI captures this...and then sends it off to the Combat AI's memory. Which then means...the Combat AI's will use the Mirror AI's intel on you...as one of many possible ways to attack you back. So let's say you try to attack with a new strategy, well the Combat AI will string together the Mirror AI's copied moves...or select one and use it to combat you, then switchs to a counter.

Current day RTS AIs can barely keep up with average players, analyzing and converting another's play to integrate it into its own attack patterns seems out of question.

Umm...are you sure? I have played versus the Company of Heroes AI and Medium on upwards...it tromps you bad.

I think the major problem is the fact that new RTS's don't scout out their opponents, and don't attempt to gather intelligence.

If the maps had shroud, fog of war, regrowing shroud, hostile environments, both the AI and human player would be on equal footing. Also eliminating the hotkeys would even it tremendously.