This is no longer the main Clash
web site. Dominic and Kull have put together a
Great new site that is mostly finished
at this point. Please go to the...
Want to request features, or suggest a great way to handle implementation
of a concept in Clash?
Check out our Forum,
at the
Apolyton Civilization Site,
Well over 2000 Posts!
Overview of the Project Civilization
Advances Chart (133K) Map AI Screen
Shot
Economy Screen Economic
Development Gaming/AI
Links
...Really Old News...
The first discussion of... Clash's RealPolitik
AI (and about Hierarchical AI in general) Still no code
:-(
The Clash of Civilizations is a computer strategy game we are developing that attempts to sketch out pretty much the whole of history in game form. The player(s) of such a game make decisions about their civilization’s economic stance (guns vs. butter), military and diplomatic actions, and a host of other things. Moving from antiquity into the current time, fostering technological and social progress of the civilization (civ) is generally a main concern of the player. Arguably, the modern progenitor of this sort of game is "Sid Meier’s Civilization", now about a decade old (and its sequel, imaginatively named Civilization II or Civ II).
I started this project because, although fascinated with the general concept, I got disgusted with all the many games of this type available. I had different quarrels with different games, but the biggest problems shared by most of these games were fairly poor AI, huge amounts of unnecessary busywork, and that they just didn't feel right in terms of the "history" they produced. The Clash of Civilizations will try to answer these defects in the others. We are now a group approaching 20 members, with similar views, working to get a game out that fixes these defects.
The Clash project is still looking for people to join. Especially needed are Java programmers with an interest in this type of game, since the biggest bottleneck right now is coding. As the project gets further along we'll also need more graphics people, and playtesters. We also need people who can criticize all the aspects of the game, from a perspective of economics, military history, AI, etc. The criticism group is needed because I think getting Clash as close to reality as possible will make it both a significantly better game and of some educational value. If the project works out as well as I think it will, the game will be put out as shareware (free demo, pay for full version). Collaborators will earn returns depending on the amount of work they've put into the project (TBD). If you're interested in participating drop me a line.
Special thanks to Dominique for doing the logo
Defects in the other Civ-type games that Clash will address
Pathetic AI
AI simply takes a lot of thought and work (modern desktop processing
power does help a lot). Either the programmers of the previous games
didn’t have a good enough grasp of their own games to see the glaring problems
in the AI, or weren't willing to devote even a minuscule fraction of the
clock cycles to AI. I'm not talking about rocket-science stuff here.
To write an AI that would beat someone that is very good at strategic games
would be Very difficult. I am not blaming the industry for not producing
AI at That level... Its relatively simple things, like the Glaring
defects in the Civ2 AI. Once typical games
get out into the wider gaming community there are Lots of people capable
of winning vs. The AI on the hardest settings every time. The current fascination
with "real-time" strategy games doesn't encourage me that substantial improvements
in AI of commercial games is likely in the near future.
In Clash we plan to:
Civ2 AI Comments, as an example...
Here's a brief critique of the AI in Civ2 (Based on limited information I don't think SMAC or Civ:CTP are much better). I'll suggest a couple of obvious improvements the AI could use (IMHO anyway). The suggestions are specific to this game, so if you aren't familiar with it, this stuff might not mean mucy... Since I'm a programmer I'll start couning with 0... ;-)0) AI needs to expand more quickly, especially at the start. It is waaaay too conservative,
1) AI should mass units for attacks (right now the AI throws individual units at enemies)
2) AI should have some concept of distance and "striking range" of each
civ. I chuckle
every time I extort money out of an AI civ half way around the world, that
I'd be Very
fortunate to wound in the slightest way. The AI also caves into pressure
Much too easily
IMO. It should take a Very serious threat to make it give up money or tech.
3) AI needs to understand the probablility of success of attacks. NO more
attacking fortified
units on mountains....
4) AI should properly execute surprise attacks (rather than not attacking
at all, or with a
single unit). When a human surprise attacks it is usually with masses of
troops on the
frontier or offshore.
5) AI should build more diplomats/spies and Use Them. Even used in a ham-handed
manner they are pretty nasty.
I haven't included anything in this list that is hard IMO... I think just
improving these
could help the AI to be a significantly better challenge.
When you get into difficult things I'd add: a notion of geography; with
this goes fewer
defensive units in interior cities; using diplomats to cancel ZOC restrictions
like people
do; having the AI build cities in niches on the shore that have only a
few land squares but
could develop into decent sized cities with a harbor...
That's probably enough ranting for now.
Clash
Forum
Apolyton Civilization
Site.
The Clash Team
My Home Page
Home Civilization
Advances Chart (133K) Map AI Screen
Shot
Economy Screen Economic
Development Gaming/AI
Links