SMACX Thinker Mod

[JoGr223]

running an AI benchmark on symmetrical map...

morgan made a very wise use of weather paradigm 


let's see if it will secure him a win, together with PTS
he is using 9 formers to raise land toward center + build roads + pushed colony pods in this direction; later i'm sure he will build mag tubes all over the place

this game univ is nerfed with -1ind and they still own ! they got HGP+VW so it's perfect SPs stack for them

AIs still make not perfect SP order: hive build CN in 2150 despite they could have build WP (it was available for them); CN was the first SP built on the planet
note this benchmark I added hive just to see how they will perform in such isolated environment where they cant get tech from others early; but this map has a lot of rivers and energy bonus so hive is not that crippled like they would normally be in less welcoming, but isolated land

[Induktio]

> That is known modern thread too but again, as someone already clearly pointed out before, we are not the major target audience for these games.
> That's why we are modifying them to our liking!!! There is no point to resort to what designer planned for it.

Sometimes I bring up topics about original game design or similar if I feel like it.

> Not to push or advertise my opinion on that but there are a lot of similar discussions in early-mid WTP forum. Other people expressing their view on similar OP issues. You may tons of useful input and reasoning for your thoughts as well.

I would ask you to be more specific when referring to these discussions, either quote something or link directly to the posts. Saying "look at this thread and skim through 500+ posts" is a little too generic.

> This discussion made me only realise how much SMAC ruleset unbalance limits viable gameplay options.
> In particullar many strategies that could provide a sense of versimilitude to the gameplay experience.

Definitely I agree that simplifying the ruleset or fixing really unbalanced mechanics should take the priority over crafting some specific AI workarounds for each of the special cases. In some parts I've already done this. It is necessary considering the high time usage in this project also. We're now pretty close to the edge of feasibility when implementing something just by patching the game engine without source code.

> I humbly submit a feature request: Is it easy to add keyboard shortcuts to the UI? I've been using an AutoHotkey script to get around the total lack of build queue shortcuts for ages. I can send you the script if you're interested in what I'm doing.

Probably each of these shortcuts will have to be manually coded and patched in the mod. There's no shortcuts for this (pun intended, hehe). What kind of functions are we talking about here?

> running an AI benchmark on symmetrical map...
> morgan made a very wise use of weather paradigm 

Yeah it's a nice map for this. However, the middle island might interfere with some AI pathfinding because all the islands are connected there. It might be a good idea to just remove the fungused middle part. That way it breaks up the land mass into smaller chunks.

[Alpha Centauri Bear]

How do you guys make AI play with each other without human involved at all? The best I can do it to have my faction build a base and don't produce anything there. So I can observe other AI playing until somebody captures my base, of course.

Also do you mind sharing this 4 AI on mirrored map scenario?

[Induktio]

Technically it should be possible to run AI-vs-AI tests even if you don't have any active units and are not watching some AI faction directly. You can maybe eliminate the player faction but still keep the game active? It's also much faster to run through the turns when fog of war obscures the AI units.

Also, about this WTP fix for the "force-ending turn while a needlejet in flight has moves left" bug:

(click to show/hide)

void patch_unfinished_needlejet_turn()
{
    int unfinished_needlejet_turn_bytes_length = 0x2;

    /*
   0:  3b c8                   cmp    ecx,eax
   */
    byte unfinished_needlejet_turn_bytes_old[] =
      { 0x3B, 0xC8 }
    ;

    /*
   0:  39 c9                   cmp    ecx,ecx
    */
    byte unfinished_needlejet_turn_bytes_new[] =
        { 0x39, 0xC9 }
    ;

    write_bytes
    (
        0x005259CE,
        unfinished_needlejet_turn_bytes_old,
        unfinished_needlejet_turn_bytes_new,
        unfinished_needlejet_turn_bytes_length
    )
    ;
   
}

So essentially that patch jumps over small piece of code in turn_upkeep that would have increased terraforming_turns variable for some unit and then immediately ended the function. Do you know what was the original purpose for this code or is it something entirely redundant? Does this fix have any side effects? The actual terraforming production calculation should be done in action_terraform function.

[JoGr223]

> running an AI benchmark on symmetrical map...
> morgan made a very wise use of weather paradigm 

Yeah it's a nice map for this. However, the middle island might interfere with some AI pathfinding because all the islands are connected there. It might be a good idea to just remove the fungused middle part. That way it breaks up the land mass into smaller chunks.

that wasnt a problem, especially given morgan's xenopathy roads

this pretty much concludes the game in year 2270...

other factions wisened up and made their own land corridors to the center... around 50 years later; so morgan got a free reign there and actually took all 4 center jungles; meanwhile he also build all the key late-game SPs with exception of HSA; so he got PEG,AV,CBA,CV,Manifold harmonics, telepatic matrix... on his way to transcendence with new tech every turn

lal and hive were fighting the most intensively... and they are the weakest; lal was "brave" enough to end pact with morgan, but only for a little while, then back to pact, not even fighting; univ and hive fought morgan for a while, maybe 30-40 years but now they are in treaty with him ! im surprised, normally they would fight to the death; maybe peaceful character of morgan alters their warmongering ? lal,hive and univ continue to have vendetta on each other tough 
there were some nice landing troops operations, eg transporting 6 units on someone's territory; other than that mostly ship fights and needlers; combined forces of AI are successfully taking over land bases through the ocean

1 thing a little surprising is that hive is stronger than lal; i think this is due to some quirkiness in fighting... at one point hive has 27 missle penetrators vs no air from lal; hive made air really early IIRC even before eco eng. ! surprised they didn't progress faster with air, as at one point early hive took over 3 of lal's sea bases near his land;nonetheless hive is occupying now lal's land bases; also it's just lal has bad luck with his position this time as he is attacked from both sides and he already lost also 2 big bases vs univ on his land + a lot on the sea

funny thing you can notice on south morgan is creeping with land toward hive  he made it to 1/3rd of the way; maybe that's why hive proposed peace ?

regarding satellites, they still dont prioritize them enough, but they build quite some this time; eg morgan 13/0/13; univ 0/0/7, rest just a few; somehow no nessus?

[Induktio]

> funny thing you can notice on south morgan is creeping with land toward hive

It seems Morgan has the most skilled bridge building engineers.. j/k

On another test you could try to set factions_enabled=3 (e.g. only first three are Thinker) and see how long the vanilla AIs fare against Thinker. Biggest problem might be to ferry all those troops across the ocean. The ferry handling is very buggy in the game, but it's still doable for Thinker.

> regarding satellites, they still dont prioritize them enough, but they build quite some this time; eg morgan 13/0/13; univ 0/7, rest just a few; somehow no nessus?

How long did they have the various techs available? Were they also simultaneously at war with each other?

[JoGr223]

> regarding satellites, they still dont prioritize them enough, but they build quite some this time; eg morgan 13/0/13; univ 0/7, rest just a few; somehow no nessus?

How long did they have the various techs available? Were they also simultaneously at war with each other?

i was checking if morgan build satellites, when he got tech he already had CBA IIRC and started with single orbital transmitter, then build another few turns later; later sky hydros here and there one; maybe 10+ years later he began building a few per turn; and that is at around 50 bases when he started his satellites; strangely he didn't build sky hydros at all at first
yes it might be that morgan was at war with hive and lal when he started with satellites; but that's not an excuse, he was still buildng a ton of facilities; and satellites are almost always the best facility when u got CBA; 2268 game in another thread Ais build no satellites at all

[dino]

Edit: I've deleted the content of this post with rebalance proposition for now, I need to put a bit more thought into it.

[EmpathCrawler]

Probably each of these shortcuts will have to be manually coded and patched in the mod. There's no shortcuts for this (pun intended, hehe). What kind of functions are we talking about here?

Hehe.

The game already provides the arrow keys for navigating the options and Enter for exiting the queue. I added shortcuts that open the queue from the base screen, add items by clicking Insert, and remove from the bottom by clicking Delete. I actually got a bit nutty and added a shortcut for Help, plus shortcuts to add or replace at every queue position but I don't really use them. It's easy enough to delete and re-add.

It's soooo nice in the early game to, say, build a base, hit C, change the first build order to a Former, hit Enter, hit my Queue shortcut, arrow over to a garrison unit, hit my Insert shortcut, arrow to a Colony Pod, hit my Insert shortcut, and hit Enter. Or to page through all my bases and enqueue some new facility at all of them when I get the tech. No mouse needed!

[Alpha Centauri Bear]

Technically it should be possible to run AI-vs-AI tests even if you don't have any active units and are not watching some AI faction directly. You can maybe eliminate the player faction but still keep the game active? It's also much faster to run through the turns when fog of war obscures the AI units.

What do you mean - should be possible? I see people posted their 4x4 AI game on mirrored map. Do I understand correctly that there is no human player there? If so - how it is done practically?

Also, about this WTP fix for the "force-ending turn while a needlejet in flight has moves left" bug:

So essentially that patch jumps over small piece of code in turn_upkeep that would have increased terraforming_turns variable for some unit and then immediately ended the function. Do you know what was the original purpose for this code or is it something entirely redundant? Does this fix have any side effects? The actual terraforming production calculation should be done in action_terraform function.

Correct. I tried to figure out what it does but failed. The condition triggers when vehicle has unspent turns and when terraforming_turns < chassis range - 1. So only when terraforming_turns == 0 and only for needlers (range == 2). I guess this is related to needler former starting terraforming in midair not spending its last moves? There is no documentation on how this feature should be used and I never heard anyone terraforming with needlers. So - hell with it.

[Alpha Centauri Bear]

I added shortcuts that open the queue from the base screen

Is it by binary modification? Can you share it?

[EmpathCrawler]

I added shortcuts that open the queue from the base screen

Is it by binary modification? Can you share it?

It's an AutoHotkey script so you'd need to install that, too. Try running the script as an administrator if it doesn't seem to be working. It relies on finding visual clues on the screen that the base or queue menu are active, then it mouse clicks where necessary. I tried to make it adjust automatically based on any resolution, but I can't promise it'll work with yours.

Alt+Q in the base screen opens the queue
Alt+Q in the queue screen adds items to the queue
Alt+D deletes from the bottom

Alt+1-8 inserts an item at that position in the queue
Ctrl+1-8 replaces an item at that position
Shift+1-8 deletes an item at that position
Alt+H opens the help

Use the arrow keys to navigate. Enter will exit with your changes, Esc will forget your changes. Those are all native shortcuts.

[dino]

Definitely I agree that simplifying the ruleset or fixing really unbalanced mechanics should take the priority over crafting some specific AI workarounds for each of the special cases. In some parts I've already done this. It is necessary considering the high time usage in this project also. We're now pretty close to the edge of feasibility when implementing something just by patching the game engine without source code.

If you'd be open to some rules changes I should have some free time to play SMAC 2-3 weeks from now and I'd be interested in playtesting some ideas I have.
For now I'd ask you implement in thinker vanilla function for unit cost that I could then modify and playtest on my own and maybe some optional base defense bonuses.

I'd start my experiments with:
1) Att/Def ratio I'd achieve by changing only weapons stats:

(click to show/hide)

Code: [Select]

#WEAPONS
Hand Weapons,         Gun,            1, 0, 1, -1, None,
Laser,                Laser,          2, 0, 2, -1, Physic,
Particle Impactor,    Impact,         3, 0, 3, -1, Chaos,
Gatling Laser,        Gatling,        4, 1, 4, -1, Super,
Missile Launcher,     Missile,        5, 2, 5, -1, Fossil,
Chaos Gun,            Chaos,          6, 0, 6, -1, String,
Fusion Laser,         Fusion,         8, 1, 8, -1, SupLube,
Tachyon Bolt,         Tachyon,        9, 1, 9, -1, Unified,
Plasma Shard,         Shard,         10, 2,10, -1, Space,
Quantum Laser,        Quantum,       12, 1,12, -1, QuanMac,
Graviton Gun,         Graviton,      15, 0,15, -1, AGrav,
Singularity Laser,    Singularity,   18, 1,18, -1, ConSing,
Resonance Laser,      R-Laser,        5, 1, 6, -1, Bioadap,
Resonance Bolt,       R-Bolt,         9, 1,12, -1, SentRes,
String Disruptor,     String,        24, 1,30, -1, BFG9000,
Psi Attack,           Psi,           -1, 2,10, -1, CentPsi,
Planet Buster,        Planet Buster, 99, 0,32, -1, Orbital,
Colony Module,        Colony Pod,     0, 8,10, -1, None,     ; Noncombat packages
Terraforming Unit,    Formers,        0, 9, 6, -1, Ecology,
Troop Transport,      Transport,      0, 7, 4, -1, DocFlex,
Supply Transport,     Supply,         0,10, 8, -1, IndAuto,
Probe Team,           Probe Team,     0,11, 4, -1, PlaNets,
Alien Artifact,       Artifact,       0,12,36, -1, Disable,
Conventional Payload, Conventional,  12, 0,12, -1, Orbital,
Tectonic Payload,     Tectonic,       0,13,24, -1, NewMiss
Fungal Payload,       Fungal,         0,14,24, -1, NewMiss


Coupled with no collateral it'd allow AI units reach human bases, but it'd also make it more difficult to destroy units in them.

2) So I'd add an option to reduce Tachyon bonus to 50%, from what I remember it's a single bit value in the binary, which results in either 50%, or 100% bonus, it's implemented in WtP.

3) While we are at WtP features, vanilla artillery damage formula rounds down to integer value, WtP gives a random chance proportional to the fractional damage to deal an additional single HP damage. It doesn't matter much but it's a nice little detail, that fixes artillery dealing below 1HP damage being completely useless.

/*****/
It shouldn't be necessary and feel free to ignore these ideas if it's too much trouble for you, but in case if either AI would start to struggle with base conquering, or it was still way too easy to steamroll AI:
1) Sensor array bonus could be removed from the base defense, it would keep base assault odds at close to vanilla level, while robbing human player of an advantage provided by destroying sensors in preparation for a base assault. Lets say that local base population provides intel about enemy positions, so the advantage provided by sensor array intel is already included in the intrinsic base defense/ perimeter defense.

2) I'd consider an optional adjustable base defense bonus that also optionally could apply only to a base defending against human controlled unit. This setting would provide a game balance option for multiplayer, or an extra optional AI cheat for a singleplayer challenge without crippling AI. I'd set it at 25% to replace sensor array bonus removed from the base defense in the previous step. It would be meant to eventually be applied to AI too, once it'd be tought to not commit to a base assault until it gathers enough units, to be able to finish damaged defenders with a second strike in the same turn and not waste units on unfinished base assault.

/*****/
Unrelated to the Att/Def change, there is some stuff that annoys me about vanilla unit cost formula, so here is what I'd try given an opportunity:
1) Vanilla unit cost formula practically forces you into specialized att, or def units like in the Civ series. Universal infantry unit since midgame can be 3.5 to 4.5x more expensive, but these armorless offensive units require careful micro and some cicumstancial considerations about army composition, so they are an advantage for humans. The idea of glass cannon infantry men that can attack but can't defend themselves is also silly and immersion breaking. So just like minimum weapon cost for a "sentinel" unit is armor+chasis/2, I'd add a simillar rule to the unit cost formula and make minimum armor cost for an "invader" unit be weapon/3, then I'd add some kind of gradual cost reduction for universal units. I'd aim at universal infantry being 2x more expensive, for mobiles it would turn to be even slightly less.

Specialist would be still more effective but all differences would be toned down enough for AI to sustain maybe 40% of universal unists in a standing army mix during peace to have adaptability to unexpected situations, while in case of war I'd make it produce only cheaper specialists as additional reinforcements to throw into the meat grinder.

2) While getting rid of reactor hit points was crucial, cutting unit cost in half still provides three moments of an extreme advantage, so I'd add an option for reactor to reduce cost by 25% instead of 50%. It'd also be a quality of life change, since it'd increase the reactor 4 units cost over 3 times, there is no depth gained by moving around in late game 30 units instead of 10, the latter only mean less busy work, less AI turn processing time and less likely running into unit limit on large maps.

There is already an alternative cost formula in WtP, but while it works better than vanilla, it's also completely different, while for thinker some slight adjustements to the original formula that wouldn't invalidate players prior experience completely would be more suitable.

[Alpha Centauri Bear]

It's an AutoHotkey script so you'd need to install that, too.

Ingenious cool stuff! Although I agree that it may be difficult to port between computers and even people as everyone may have their own automation preferences.

[Alpha Centauri Bear]

Other options and thoughts.

1) Att/Def ratio I'd achieve by changing only weapons stats:

Keep in mind that item appearance time is equally important. For example, in vanilla the weapon:armor ration goes like 4:3 in the mid game. So sixth weapon is 8 and sixth armor is 6. That is not a big visual difference. However, due to their position on tech tree this 8-weapon got discovered when normally only 3-armor is available. That timing makes enormous difference.

1) Sensor array bonus could be removed from the base defense, it would keep base assault odds at close to vanilla level, while robbing human player of an advantage provided by destroying sensors in preparation for a base assault. Lets say that local base population provides intel about enemy positions, so the advantage provided by sensor array intel is already included in the intrinsic base defense/ perimeter defense.

Option: make them indistructible.

2) I'd consider an optional adjustable base defense bonus that also optionally could apply only to a base defending against human controlled unit. This setting would provide a game balance option for multiplayer, or an extra optional AI cheat for a singleplayer challenge without crippling AI. I'd set it at 25% to replace sensor array bonus removed from the base defense in the previous step. It would be meant to eventually be applied to AI too, once it'd be tought to not commit to a base assault until it gathers enough units, to be able to finish damaged defenders with a second strike in the same turn and not waste units on unfinished base assault.

If you want to add penalty for human attack/defense why not just add flat bonus everywhere? Not specifically for base attack only.

About same effect you can achieve by slowing down human research or speeding up AI research.
Extra AI production bonuses generate theoretically bigger AI army. Not the same exactly effect but could be comparable.

1) Vanilla unit cost formula practically forces you into specialized att, or def units like in the Civ series.

Optionally, mixed units may be slightly costlier than specialist ones. Like 6-1-1 = 1-6-1 and 6-6-1 would cost 50% more.

2) While getting rid of reactor hit points was crucial, cutting unit cost in half still provides three moments of an extreme advantage, so I'd add an option for reactor to reduce cost by 25% instead of 50%. It'd also be a quality of life change, since it'd increase the reactor 4 units cost over 3 times, there is no depth gained by moving around in late game 30 units instead of 10, the latter only mean less busy work, less AI turn processing time and less likely running into unit limit on large maps.

Good direction. I also implemented something like this reducing cost by 20% each reactor level totaling at 50% reduction with top level reactor. Should be noticeable without making top level units absolutely cheap.

There is already an alternative cost formula in WtP, but while it works better than vanilla, it's also completely different, while for thinker some slight adjustements to the original formula that wouldn't invalidate players prior experience completely would be more suitable.

I would dare to say there is no vanilla cost mechanics players remember by heart and used to build their strategy on that. Do you, for example, remember the cost of 1-10-1 infantry or 10-1-2 rover or even 10-10-6 cruiser or 16-1-8 needler? Do you remember cost progression? Do you ever involved it into your att-def discussion points, for example? Cost is an absolute integral point of balance. Yet, you omit its valuation when you try to balance weapon with armor. Not only you but other people too. Somehow they see attack and defense values but not the cost behind units.

WTP just streamlined this unit cost system so people do not actually need to think about it. They would naturally assume 6-1-1 unit cost same as 1-6-1 one and be done with it.

Just my opinion though. Experience of other people may vary.