TowerMind: A Tower Defence Game Learning Environment and Benchmark for LLM as Agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.05899v1
• Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2026 16:18:08 GMT
• Title: TowerMind: A Tower Defence Game Learning Environment and Benchmark for LLM as Agents
• Authors: Dawei Wang, Chengming Zhou, Di Zhao, Xinyuan Liu, Marci Chi Ma, Gary Ushaw, Richard Davison,
• Abstract summary: We present TowerMind, a novel environment grounded in the tower defense subgenre of RTS games.<n>We design five benchmark levels to evaluate several widely used Large Language Models.<n>Results reveal a clear performance gap between LLMs and human experts across both capability and hallucination dimensions.
• Score: 5.173133826653683
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Recent breakthroughs in Large Language Models (LLMs) have positioned them as a promising paradigm for agents, with long-term planning and decision-making emerging as core general-purpose capabilities for adapting to diverse scenarios and tasks. Real-time strategy (RTS) games serve as an ideal testbed for evaluating these two capabilities, as their inherent gameplay requires both macro-level strategic planning and micro-level tactical adaptation and action execution. Existing RTS game-based environments either suffer from relatively high computational demands or lack support for textual observations, which has constrained the use of RTS games for LLM evaluation. Motivated by this, we present TowerMind, a novel environment grounded in the tower defense (TD) subgenre of RTS games. TowerMind preserves the key evaluation strengths of RTS games for assessing LLMs, while featuring low computational demands and a multimodal observation space, including pixel-based, textual, and structured game-state representations. In addition, TowerMind supports the evaluation of model hallucination and provides a high degree of customizability. We design five benchmark levels to evaluate several widely used LLMs under different multimodal input settings. The results reveal a clear performance gap between LLMs and human experts across both capability and hallucination dimensions. The experiments further highlight key limitations in LLM behavior, such as inadequate planning validation, a lack of multifinality in decision-making, and inefficient action use. We also evaluate two classic reinforcement learning algorithms: Ape-X DQN and PPO. By offering a lightweight and multimodal design, TowerMind complements the existing RTS game-based environment landscape and introduces a new benchmark for the AI agent field. The source code is publicly available on GitHub(https://github.com/tb6147877/TowerMind).

Related papers

• BotzoneBench: Scalable LLM Evaluation via Graded AI Anchors [9.224594551677374]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in interactive environments requiring strategic decision-making.<n>Recent game-based evaluations employ LLM-vs-LLM tournaments that produce relative rankings dependent on transient model pools.<n>Here we show that anchoring LLM evaluation to fixed hierarchies of skill-calibrated game Artificial Intelligence (AI) enables linear-time absolute skill measurement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-22T13:15:08Z)
• LLMsPark: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models in Strategic Gaming Contexts [19.97430860742638]
  We present a game theory-based evaluation platform that measures large language models' decision-making strategies and social behaviors in classic game-theoretic settings.<n>Our system cross-evaluates 15 leading LLMs using leaderboard rankings and scoring mechanisms.<n>This work introduces a novel perspective for evaluating LLMs' strategic intelligence, enriching existing benchmarks and broadening their assessment in interactive, game-theoretic scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-20T10:21:17Z)
• PillagerBench: Benchmarking LLM-Based Agents in Competitive Minecraft Team Environments [48.892997022500765]
  We introduce PillagerBench, a framework for evaluating multi-agent systems in real-time competitive team-vs-team scenarios in Minecraft.<n>We also propose TactiCrafter, an LLM-based multi-agent system that facilitates teamwork through human-readable tactics.<n>Our evaluation demonstrates that TactiCrafter outperforms baseline approaches and showcases adaptive learning through self-play.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-07T22:51:12Z)
• Who is a Better Player: LLM against LLM [53.46608216197315]
  We propose an adversarial benchmarking framework to assess the comprehensive performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) through board games competition.<n>We introduce Qi Town, a specialized evaluation platform that supports 5 widely played games and involves 20 LLM-driven players.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-05T06:41:47Z)
• KORGym: A Dynamic Game Platform for LLM Reasoning Evaluation [78.96590724864606]
  We introduce the Knowledge Orthogonal Reasoning Gymnasium (KORGym), a dynamic evaluation platform inspired by KOR-Bench and Gymnasium.<n>KORGym offers over fifty games in either textual or visual formats and supports interactive, multi-turn assessments with reinforcement learning scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T16:06:32Z)
• V-MAGE: A Game Evaluation Framework for Assessing Vision-Centric Capabilities in Multimodal Large Language Models [84.27290155010533]
  We introduce Vision-centric Multiple Abilities Game Evaluation (V-MAGE), a novel game-based evaluation framework.<n>V-MAGE features five distinct video games comprising over 30 carefully constructed evaluation scenarios.<n>We show V-MAGE provides actionable insights for improving the visual and reasoning capabilities of MLLMs in dynamic, interactive settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-08T15:43:01Z)
• AVA: Attentive VLM Agent for Mastering StarCraft II [56.07921367623274]
  We introduce Attentive VLM Agent (AVA), a multimodal StarCraft II agent that aligns artificial agent perception with the human gameplay experience.<n>Our agent addresses this limitation by incorporating RGB visual inputs and natural language observations that more closely simulate human cognitive processes during gameplay.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-07T12:54:25Z)
• GAMEBoT: Transparent Assessment of LLM Reasoning in Games [54.49589494014147]
  GAMEBoT is a gaming arena designed for rigorous assessment of Large Language Models.<n>We benchmark 17 prominent LLMs across eight games, encompassing various strategic abilities and game characteristics.<n>Our results suggest that GAMEBoT presents a significant challenge, even when LLMs are provided with detailed CoT prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-18T08:32:53Z)
• TMGBench: A Systematic Game Benchmark for Evaluating Strategic Reasoning Abilities of LLMs [45.12542636218608]
  We propose TMGBench, characterized by comprehensive game type coverage, diverse scenarios and flexible game organization.<n>Specifically, we incorporate all 144 game types summarized by the Robinson-Goforth topology of 2x2 games, constructed as classic games in our benchmark.<n>To provide a sustainable evaluation framework adaptable to increasingly powerful LLMs, we treat the aforementioned games as atomic units.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T13:15:34Z)
• Atari-GPT: Benchmarking Multimodal Large Language Models as Low-Level Policies in Atari Games [2.2648566044372416]
  We introduce a novel benchmark aimed at testing the emergent capabilities of multimodal LLMs as low-level policies in Atari games.<n>Our study assesses the performances of multiple multimodal LLMs against traditional RL agents, human players, and random agents.<n>Our results show that these multimodal LLMs are not yet capable of being zero-shot low-level policies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-28T17:08:56Z)
• GameBench: Evaluating Strategic Reasoning Abilities of LLM Agents [4.209869303518743]
  We introduce GameBench, a cross-domain benchmark for evaluating strategic reasoning abilities of large language models. Our evaluations use GPT-3 and GPT-4 in their base form along with two scaffolding frameworks designed to enhance strategic reasoning ability: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting and Reasoning Via Planning (RAP) Our results show that none of the tested models match human performance, and at worst GPT-4 performs worse than random action.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-07T00:28:43Z)
• GTBench: Uncovering the Strategic Reasoning Limitations of LLMs via Game-Theoretic Evaluations [87.99872683336395]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are integrated into critical real-world applications. This paper evaluates LLMs' reasoning abilities in competitive environments. We first propose GTBench, a language-driven environment composing 10 widely recognized tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T18:23:36Z)
• SPRING: Studying the Paper and Reasoning to Play Games [102.5587155284795]
  We propose a novel approach, SPRING, to read the game's original academic paper and use the knowledge learned to reason and play the game through a large language model (LLM) In experiments, we study the quality of in-context "reasoning" induced by different forms of prompts under the setting of the Crafter open-world environment. Our experiments suggest that LLMs, when prompted with consistent chain-of-thought, have great potential in completing sophisticated high-level trajectories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T18:14:35Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.