Read Op 1st Addition Of Supplemental Assistive AI's For HumanvComp Matches and/or Human v Human?

I want to see the general consensus Of the public on this Idea.

I would like to start by bringing up the current level of control required to maximize your production capabilities.

I have a lot of engineers and wish to build and maintain my infrastructure, (econ and fabrication) pace my

Upgrade to T2 econ, fabrication and military

Manage engineer assist, orbital.. 4th planetary expansion etc....

It isn't to much for one surface but with most matches having combat that occurs on multiple-planets/surfaces it will begin to become a lot to handle for one human being. the problem of having to many processes to handle shouldn't be a problem when playing against other human players as we are all "slow" compared to the death dealing AI that will be developed, Thanks Sorian. However for people who wish to play single player galactic wars vs. an AI a human will be at a significant disadvantage especially towards the back end of the game and lets face it we can't compete against such a high level of efficiency.

Now before the "I always beat the AI" comments come in... tell me, how many surfaces are you playing on against the AI... The answer at the moment for all current scenarios is 1 due to the AI's inability to effectively colonize other surfaces should the human opponent give a seconds worth of effort. It is safe to assume that in the future the AI will utilize, to their maximum utility, all tools at its disposal to destroy... us.

Remember the AI is essentially a piece-wise function
If....x
If....y
If....z
Execute...m
No user interface. Only numbers, rates and coded responses. able to calculate and execute in the nano-second time scale.
Humans... not a chance

So what I'd like to see discussion on is the addition of a Supplemental commander (obviously toggle on/off based on match preference) that is controlled to a degree by an AI. I'm not a programer so I don't understand how difficult the implementation of such a feature would work however some features I'dlike to see are as follows

(Behavior is probably a more suitable replacement for the word Personality but as long as my point is well recieved)

1). Sub commander AI personalities

a) much like the traditional personalities you can set for an opponent AI in most other RTS games. (base builder, econ, aggressive)

2). The ability to select a range of operation for that commander. Similar to that of Area Commands

a). After the commander is built i can, via some user interface menu (similar to construction?),
select my personality for the sub-commmander and hold lets say left click and then drag out to adjust a radius that will become the circular area of "operation for that sub-commander AI.

3). I want to be able to change personalities as planetary situations change

a). obviously if I'm on a planet alone i want a base builder/ econ focused sub-commander as opposed to a planet that I'm being attacked on where i will need a more aggressive unit producing commander
4). Balance.... tricky and i may be going about it incorrectly.... The Sub-Commander AI "intelligence" would scale based on a few parameters.

a). The presence of primary AI's in game (I define primary AI as an army only controlled by the neural network... no human control) If a Say a level 10 Opponent AI it present in the game all human sub-commanders would be at level "x"(chose x for the sake of discussion). we don't want sub-commanders to be smarter then our Computer opponents as that would be to easy.

b). my second scaling parameter would be the size of the simulation. larger maps would mean more fronts, units and bases to manage therefor the sub-commanders should be more intelligent to scale. the inverse also applies

c). once a sub-commander intelligence level is determined by the above parameters that intelligence level is applied to all human players no exceptions as to balance it out

i). perhaps sub-commander limit per planet the preventing a spam of little AI's

So now that I'm done. Vote... and tell me whats up.

Hmmmm im not so keen on that honestly .... definitevely not something i would want to see on pvp matches .... as you are asking for even more options to give managment to the ai to handle and thus letting the game play itself more ... people proposed even automated attackpatterns and priority lists for areacommands that take a good chunk of involvment away ... for me it kinda takes away the challange to manage a scale like this
and im not sure to were to draw the line on that honestly ...
i think i wait to see what the others have to say

I like more to be in command of everything

Command Priority shouldn't (hopefully) be to hard of a task to implement

It took me a few passes just to understand the title! XD

I'm not sure how well this would work out, it depends on how well the AI plays. Having a spare commander wouldn't be too bad though...

Ok... Right....

Someone please translate that title to English

the title roughly translates to:

"Can we have AI commanders that are allied with players, in team games?"

Or at least that's what I read.

To me it reads like can we have a buildable subcommander that is a managing ai of sorts

Well we can see that everyone understood the title since everyone is saying something different about it

Those are the best arguments! The ones where everyone is arguing about a different topic!

Sure let's argue about the title not the topic, know what lets argue about something else what about the tie you are wearing today?

Well my tie is obviously better considering it's a seal skin bow tie. (i'm not joking)

Is the addition of a Supplemental AI that Assists the Player a good thing for the various types of matches described above.. It to me isn't that difficult to understand...

I can understand it, it's just that you made the title unnecessarily complex. You weren't using as clear and concise of a title as you could have been. You could simply have said "AI sub-commander?" or something like that.

Says the guy with that signature.

I read the title as "Can we have more AI's to help the AI's to be better AI's"

Yo Dawg I heard you like AI vs Player!

So we put an AI into yo AI so your AI can plan while it plans!

Yo Dawg is that 3 AI's your fighting? What about an AI to help the three AI's, while each AI has an AI that helps them AI!

...

We need to go deeper

Hey het hey... ill admit my communication problem but ill also say lets focus on the topic i have attempted to present and not my.. unique quality of presentation

AI doesnt need assistance as it is a equation... a series of inputs that if re-created will yield the same out put every time... that being said its not making a decission like a human but following a Pre-programed response...

i personally see the addition of an assistive AI to be benificial when you are playing AGAINST OTHER COMPUTERS on larger scale battles. Which in all honesty describes a fair majority of what the galactic war will be about... now yes I got this game for multiplayer exerience but i love to play against the AI on my own conditions.

A huge part of my reason for wanting something like this rests on what i interpret the primary purpose of the galactic war to be.. massive replayable single player battles...

Really seal skin ??

Great suggestion! I think it's feasible to implement development time -wise, and just the type of thing that could both increase the fun factor, and break some preconceptions players come aboard with. It distantly reminds me of MOBA games, where you play part in basicaly CPU vs. CPU fight.