MINER AI

[raumvogel]

QUOTE (LANS @ Feb 11 2018, 12:59 PM) Can you give specific examples of exactly what the miners did that you didn't like that is a result of the recent AI changes, and not pre-existing miner behavior, or an accidental wrong command?

You can claim what they are supposed to do,but what they really do is suicide themselves in the enemy sector without being directed.

[Dome]

since update I've seen miners walk through enemy sector to get to safe sector.

[ryujin]

Like I said, the changes were made with the best intentions, and I appreciate the hard work.

I will say, on Xynth's list, #1 is the one change I totally dig- they won't go to sectors too offload that have enemy bases in them, and it seems to be implemented fine.

As far as criticism go, I will try to remember the many things I have noticed that I don't like.

The biggest, is they don't really do what they are told. I send it to a sector owned to mine, they keep going to the teleport first. Even with factions that don't offload at teleports. Unintentional I'm sure, but it drives me crazy. They also seem to go to teleports at random times.

Although Idle miners are not worth much, they are worth 3500-4500 more than a dead mienr, on top of whatever he3 might be lost when the miner dies. I would rather idle miners not to go empty sectors that they think are safe.

The going to the center of the sector thing can be useful at times, but more often than not, it results in a loss of efficiency in mining. Its much better for the mienr to just go to the first he3 rock found, and if there are none seen, heading to the center is ok, PROVIDED that it will immediately go to the first he3 found.

I've seen a miner I order walk 6 sectors through owned sectors, instead of walk 2 across 1 empty, but safe sector. If the mienrs are automatically going to "safe" sectors, oviously they should make this logical conclusion.

Mostly though, if mienr AI changes are made, test it more and hen test it more again before releasing it.
Like the miners going to the teleport thing, the consistently seem to have weird behavior of doing things other than what you tell them.

TL;DR:

Not going to sectors with enemy bases is cool.

Other than that, the behavior seems inconsistent and inefficient, and the miners do weird things like going to teleports instead of mining. Also, as one who commands often, I would rather a miner sit in base and wait for it to be ordered than walk off to a random sector it considers safe to mine (where either it isn't safe, or is less efficient than the miner chain I set up with bases.)

But all that said, I do appreciate the work put in to better the AI behavior, so don't take my criticism's personally.

[ryujin]

QUOTE (Xynth @ Feb 11 2018, 07:29 AM) So are they just new broken in a way you aren't used to for the last 20 years? Is there something in particular they do now that causes issues? I will agree that a set of 7 changes were made and maybe they aren't all good, but can we explore those changes and see if any are good? Maybe we can identify one thing to roll back that makes them better. Anything jumping out in this list? Should we roll to a subset of 3 of these that people think are most (positively) impactful and try that?

Utility AI (Radulfr)
1 Miners will avoid going into sectors which have bases from both sides.
2 Miners will consider sectors that are entirely surrounded by friendly sectors as safe to mine in. (Also tech cons will look for their rock there.)
3 When miners start going to a new sector to mine, a notification will be shown to everyone on the team on the bottom of the screen.
4 When docked in a station which has enemies nearby, miners will be more hesitant to undock without being ordered to. (Without being ordered to stay docked)
5 When sending a miner to a sector without specifying a task, a reasonable one is chosen right away instead of once the miner is in the sector. This prevents the miner from going straight back to the previous sector.
The miner docks if damaged or full, mines otherwise, and If neither can be done, it will move to the center of the sector. This does not apply to unexplored sectors.
6 Miners will not go back to the previously mined He3 asteroid, if they can't fill 50% of their cargo on it. Instead they will look for the best rock after unloading, which may still send them back to the previous rock.
7 If being sent to a sector by a player command, the miner will remember the sector. After unloading, it will first check if anything more can be mined in that sector.

Edit: I'll just leave this here.
Don't find fault, find a remedy; anybody can complain.

So to clarify:
1- Yes
2- No
3- Yes (not like players pay attention anyway though)
4- Yes (haven't noticed it work though)
5- Sounds good on paper, not sure the implementation is working
6- No (maybe if you set it at 25%, though Im not sure what it was like previously)
7- No, I'd rather miner sit in base. A good comm will notice an idle miner.

I think a lot of the effort was to make miners a little more automated, but in reality allegiance is a very economically based game, and commanders do better with more control over the miner (unless the commanders are below a certain level that they leave 4 idle miners in base for 15 minutes)

Again to reiterate, I DO really appreciate the time and work put into trying to upgrade the AI.

[Xynth]

QUOTE (Ryujin @ Feb 11 2018, 08:17 PM) So to clarify:
1- Yes
2- No
3- Yes (not like players pay attention anyway though)
4- Yes (haven't noticed it work though)
5- Sounds good on paper, not sure the implementation is working
6- No (maybe if you set it at 25%, though Im not sure what it was like previously)
7- No, I'd rather miner sit in base. A good comm will notice an idle miner.

I think a lot of the effort was to make miners a little more automated, but in reality allegiance is a very economically based game, and commanders do better with more control over the miner (unless the commanders are below a certain level that they leave 4 idle miners in base for 15 minutes)

Again to reiterate, I DO really appreciate the time and work put into trying to upgrade the AI.

Radulfr, is it possible to make a build with a small subset of the changes, test that out, and then bring your other changes in one at a time until we figure out what is making miners go (extra) stupid?

We need a beta server set up. Steam has given us a great way to test clients but servers (at least their affect on real games) is not easily testable.

[Radulfr]

Thanks Ryujin, that is some useful feedback.

QUOTE (Ryujin @ Feb 11 2018, 09:10 PM) I send it to a sector owned to mine, they keep going to the teleport first. Even with factions that don't offload at teleports. Unintentional I'm sure, but it drives me crazy. They also seem to go to teleports at random times.

I can see now that I don't differentiate between bases they can offload at, and ones they can not, when they are sent to sectors.
The random times might be other people sending them into sectors.

QUOTE (Ryujin @ Feb 11 2018, 09:10 PM) Although Idle miners are not worth much, they are worth 3500-4500 more than a dead mienr, on top of whatever he3 might be lost when the miner dies. I would rather idle miners not to go empty sectors that they think are safe.

I think we could use a setting for miners to not mine anywhere unless told. Probably not going to be done by me though.

QUOTE (Ryujin @ Feb 11 2018, 09:10 PM) The going to the center of the sector thing can be useful at times, but more often than not, it results in a loss of efficiency in mining. Its much better for the mienr to just go to the first he3 rock found, and if there are none seen, heading to the center is ok, PROVIDED that it will immediately go to the first he3 found.

The only time it should go to the center of a sector is, if the sector it is sent to is (partially) explored, AND there are no bases, AND there is nothing (visible) to mine there. Is this not the case?

QUOTE (Ryujin @ Feb 11 2018, 09:10 PM) I've seen a miner I order walk 6 sectors through owned sectors, instead of walk 2 across 1 empty, but safe sector. If the mienrs are automatically going to "safe" sectors, oviously they should make this logical conclusion.

True, I've seen that in the code, but ignored it. Will change.

QUOTE (Ryujin @ Feb 11 2018, 09:10 PM) Mostly though, if mienr AI changes are made, test it more and hen test it more again before releasing it.

Testing takes a lot of time. I think I've spent about as much time testing than I have programming for this. The problem is, I change stuff during testing and then I'd have to start over with the testing.
Also, I can't test everything in a two player game.

We have two US east servers, it would make sense to have one of them as test server. That would be a BackTrak thing though..

[Radulfr]

Alright, #5 was @#(!. It makes miners less responsive, when that is their problem in the first place.

Totally redid that and also made miners more reactive in some other ways. I think you are going to like it (or shout at me again).


PS: I get cranky if my K/D ratio drops well below 1. Love you terran

[MagisterXF94]

QUOTE (Radulfr @ Feb 19 2018, 08:33 AM) Alright, #5 was @#(!. It makes miners less responsive, when that is their problem in the first place.

Totally redid that and also made miners more reactive in some other ways. I think you are going to like it (or shout at me again).


PS: I get cranky if my K/D ratio drops well below 1. Love you terran

[Imago]

I'm all for putting more experimental in experimental mode... check it out... tie your changes to that and post a thing to the steams

[Radulfr]

Cool, I didn't realize that is a thing.
I'm just not sure it would get used much. I don't think I ever found myself playing an Experimental game.
Maybe turning the thing around and enabling new stuff by default, but giving the option to turn it off would be better.

Making East2 a beta server would be my preferred solution for this. It would not require additional code/effort.