I step away from the site for a couple weeks, come back expecting multiple fascinating new diaries, fail to be disappointed, then go to the forums . . . and find zero new posts! Zero! This will not do. http://www.cardhunter.com/2012/05/lazy-card-hunter http://www.cardhunter.com/2012/05/the-ai-in-card-hunter There, I posted. I like the thought process that went into auto-targeting, and I am a firm believer in allowing "control-click" options. I have more to note about the AI one. First . . . . . . Ew, one of the victory squares is in acid. Ewwww. Second, could you folks say more about the relationship BETWEEN the card scores and the board evaluation? The description makes it ambiguous which one takes the lead. In the first example, when you look at the "cryptic" card scores list (it doesn't look terribly cryptic to me--only the source of the scores is unknown), Nimble Strike is selected based on the scores. Then, per the description, a target square on the board is chosen. In a lower example, you state "For example, we have the 'healer' tag: When applied to an AI, this AI will change his board evaluation to favor those squares from which he is in healing range of his allies." This implies that the board itself is used in the decision of which card is selected. Are there separate board evaluations performed for each possible card? Do these affect the card scores? Is there instead a single board evaluation which has a lead role in card selection?
Yeah, I think I killed the forum a bit when I moved and didn't post anything for several weeks. Hopefully we'll get some more activity around here once we start posting more news. To answer your question about evaluations - there are two types going on: board evaluations and card evaluations. Board evaluations are used to decide where to move to. Card evaluations are used to decide which card to play. In general, they don't interact although I could imagine a card evaluation taking account of board evaluations. The healer tag described is one that affects board evaluations. Healers generally want to be in range of allies and out of range of enemies. Does that make sense?
It was an interesting look at the AI, but... I, uhh... look, the diaries are nice, but I have nothing to say. I'm just waiting to be able to play. So... yeah. Sorry. Not a big forum guy. Just make sure I can turn OFF the auto-targeting thing immediately upon starting the game, and it'll all be good.
If I am chosen to be a beta tester, I would be sure to leave the auto-target on so that I can give you guys feedback about all features of the game. AI-wise, perhaps in the future we can learn more about card/board evaluations for minions, or about the variety of different tags and the number of AI combinations. This could segue into a deeper look at building a scenario and setting up a challenging variety of opponents. EDIT: I've just thought of a question: how are starting locations determined? It wasn't immediately obvious from the board editor preview whether you always fall into random slots or if party order can be a factor. Because if the dragon keeps taking out my priest, I might try to find a less vulnerable setup.
AI is always so interesting--while I'm sure we've only seen a little peek behind the scenes here, I did have a few questions: How will card ratings be affected when the game goes live? If players discover a unique combo or something is found to be ineffective, will the ratings change? If so, will the change need to be entered manually,or is the AI adaptive in being able to review past games? ((side note, can we see the AI's hands on replays?)) Is the idea of a map-making feature still in the works? Could we set up our own AI decks and put emphasis on what roles to stick to? Does the AI recognize a card's maximum potential rating when deciding to make a play? Sure, a big meaty hit on the fighter next to you will score high, but maybe that attack would be better used to one-hit the wizard in a few turns (when the card's rating would probably be through the roof if the AI had kept it). Same goes with a card with multiple effects--will a heal + debuff be saved to satisfy both conditions, or is that simply the most likely result given the typical value of the card? Does the AI know to keep a "Heal 6hp + debuff" card and play an inferior "Heal 5hp" card for the sake of better returns later? Is the AI aware of the opposition's movement speed and ranges when making board value calculations? Would an AI wizard be willing to stay a little closer to a slow dwarf than a quick elf? Do they know to stay out of range from my projectile attacks? Feel free to answer none of these if you want, I'm just thinking aloud!
By "replays," do you mean "when I go back and play the same level again after having beaten it once," or "when I record a match using the in-game 'record replay' feature, then view it after play"? Side note, will we have an in-game "record replay" feature?
