: How do I plot the defeat of an all-knowing, god-like antagonist? I have a plot bunny lingering in my head about a rag-tag band of defective cyborgs facing off against a god-like supercomputer.

You have a god-like all-knowing supercomputer. Probably a quantum one or better i guess. The key points you need to focus to get a solution i believe are:

Your villain is not perfect versus anything. Treat this as an axiom - somehow it will be 'defeated' by the protagonists.

You need to define the reason of opposition between the cyborgs and the super computer. Victory is not always a result of 'combat'. Such a super computer may agree to a diplomatic win-win solution, if the reason of opposition permits.

You need to define the 'field' of opposition. For example the computer may reside to a heavily fortified installation, obviously autonomous from any aspect including ... energy. Because anything needs 'food!' So, what happens if the protagonists sabotage energy reserves and destroy solar panels and whatever energy alternatives exist? Villain remains a god-like computer ... but shut down.

You need to define the 'rules of combat'. This are what actual means each side has to alter the actions of the other side at any magnitude. It is likely the protagonists have very few weak options while the computer has lots and powerful. What if the protagonists use their opponent strength against him at the right time at the right place?

Example: During a struggle looking as a diversion one of the cyborgs, the 'acrobat', jumps in to the 'main area', not shielded and with her armor removed or replaced with ... compressed paper(!). The supercomputer understands the diversion and 'sniffs' this acrobat cyborg action as the main attack, and shoots the cyborg with one of his defense options e.g. a never-miss guardian cyborg with a weapon. The supercomputer make no mistakes, recognizes the real attack and fires to repel it. The shot however goes through the protagonist, kill him, and hit something vital (CPU core? some emergency fuel pack?). Because the protagonist remove all her protection and sacrifice herself - something the supercomputer had not foreseen. Calculations where stop at the point where the cyborg took and absorb the shot - not penetrate through.

The 'means of combat' may give you a nice set of options. A computer virus is smart but trivial example.

Another point is the 'existence' of the villain. How it exists and manifests? At the 'field of combat' i used the installation example. Does it exists at one or at multiple places? Does he 'moves' with some means or he is bounded? If it exists at multiple places it becomes tragically difficult. Still options can be found - what if the protagonists through some means convince different 'places' of existence that are ... actually different 'existences'? They will succeed divided the 'personality' of the villain, effectively raise multi-personality issues and ... civil war!

Finally, the background is a good point and may give you options. This super computer was build for a purpose back then. But now that purpose is long bypassed. The creator(s) may had been prepared some safety options that the protagonists need to find and exploit.

---

(0)

I've struggled with this too. 'Perfect' characters aren't as enthralling to read about or to write, and they're much more difficult to connect with. Here's some advice based on what I've found works well for me!

My Psychology teacher once gave a lecture about the relationships between a person's good and bad traits. A lot of writers approach building a character with a mindset that a character's flaws can be selected at random, but the truth is that this isn't logical. A character's greatest weaknesses will stem from their greatest strengths.
For example, a character who is extremely determined to succeed will likely also be very stubborn. In that, the character could possibly refuse to accept advice from others, even when that advice is vital to their success. Stubborn characters may also be more likely to want to complete their goal without help from others, which could lead the character to shutting out their friends and family, stretching themselves too thin, or becoming self-involved or overly confident.

Of course, that's just a hypothetical example, but approaching your character with the same logic is bound to create a protagonist with more depth!

Hope this helps! Best of luck.

---

(0)

It sounds like you are doing what I do sometimes - focusing on the finding a weakness in the defences of the antagonist rather than asking where the protagonist is in any way better or different.

Greek Tragedy might be of help here. They had a concept called Hamartia - a fatal flaw leading to the downfall of a tragic hero or heroine. Which sounds like what you are looking for. Often this flaw was because of rather than in spite of the strength.

In your case, the computer is unfeeling towards humanity and therefore lacks empathy. As long as the human units act in their own best interests, the AI wins. But, what if the humans and cyborgs act against their interests, or act randomly, or are utterly illogical?

What if the protagonists act from the emotions that the computer does not understand? Surely then it would be at the least surprised.

At heart, your story sounds like an exploration of the human condition, albeit in a really interesting sci-fi that I would love to read. Here your cyborg gang's best attribute is that they do have empathy, they do feel pain and they are not always logical.

Additionally, the AI is designed to manage the odds and minimise risk. The emotional human types would, on the other hand, be willing to gamble on unpredictable outcomes. They might be willing to try hopeless, million-to-one, shots.

Could, for example, this lead to an act of self-sacrifice that brings a faction, unexpectedly (for the cynical god-like AI) to side with the protagonists? Does it inspire self-sacrifice in others? Does the AI have any defense against such actions?

Can the protagonists randomise things so that neither side has any idea what will happen? Or at the very least leave the outcome somewhat open to chance?

The AI is built around understanding gain but it would have a limited understanding of the human ability to willingly lose, give up in the face of apparent victory, or stubborn refusal to take a path of apparent gain.

In fact, there was a Star Trek episode where Data won a game by refusing to take any path of advancement until his opponent rage quit. He points out "I did not win, he quit".

Could the emotional humans provoke an emotional act of frustration in the AI?

Could the cyborgs create so much chaos that the AI has to devote increasing amounts of runtime to calculating what will happen whereas the human protagonists simply go with the flow and hope for the best? Could they, perhaps, do this so much that the AI is locked up with calculations and no longer paying attention somewhere?

There is lots you could do with this, I think. I hope I have given you a few ideas.

TL;DR: The "skills" required here are simply the ability to think in new ways about the differences between the protagonist and the antagonist and make that the "battlefield". Especially, any area where a character's strength might also be a weakness.

---

(0)