I seem to recall hearing during the pre-release hype possibly in a video with Pete Murray that the AI now tried harder to win and city states didn't try and win. I haven't once seen the AI get close to winning though or heard other people say the AI had troubled them? Quite the opposite infact, the AI has been in a position of power yet made stupid errors like leaving it's capital undefended when out conquering other AI's. Admitedly I haven't played many games. I completed 4 games back to back over the first week on settler, chieftain, warlord and prince then got bored on King and I haven't been back since.

Has anyone actually been defeated by the AI and which victory did the AI achieve? I'm guessing the only victory I'm going to hear about is an AI conquest victory.

Even Pete says in the video that he was trying to achieve a culture victory in his latest playthrough but ended up winning via conquest and he mentions "easy-mode diplomatic victory" as the Greeks, though quickly adds "but it's very, very satisfying".

Video here (http://uk.gamespot.com/shows/now-playing/?event=now_playing_civilization_v20100917).

That concept now looks like they were preparing for the complaints about the AI and the diplomacy. They had to know how bad it was so they prepared for the release so each time something erratic happened they could say: it's because they are playing to win, so they try to surprise you!

EDIT: I think the idea was brilliant, since it got them several followers that keep repeating that each time we show an example of how random and nonesense diplomacy and AI decissions are.

Not me. Even if the AI is in the position to win, it simply don`t try. I remember one of my games, where the lasr AI has an entire continent, larger then mine. It had a tech lead, it had more production. Still I won a space race, because the AI did neither try to win nor try to stop me ... :(

In an other game, Ramses build the UN - but fail to bribe the city states to vote for him.

Not me. Even if the AI is in the position to win, it simply don`t try. I remember one of my games, where the lasr AI has an entire continent, larger then mine. It had a tech lead, it had more production. Still I won a space race, because the AI did neither try to win nor try to stop me ... :(

In an other game, Ramses build the UN - but fail to bribe the city states to vote for him.

Hmmm, this was the example I thought we would see more than an AI victory.

i never finish a game...but i only see Ai fighting continuos war between the others ai player achiving nothing...i've reach the medieval era, but now i'm really bored about press continuosly the next turn button (why all the things cost so much? 50 turns for a barrackS? :| ) , and i'm at the top of the ranking ( i like the point victory above the others)....with praticaly no competitor....

same here, I was playing on emperor level and babylonians entered modern era then I was still laging in medieval, they finally conquered pretty much all the world except me, had several times bigger production capacity and population, but never went for a science victory, nor did some effort to win diplomatically, somehow I don't think AI can ever win culturally,
and obviously they coudn't conquer me either even with much more advanced units..
so finally I was catching up quite well on science, but got bored of the map as I really was supposed to have lost by that time, that didn't seem fair..
so the answer is NO - in the games I played I never seen an AI win, in all the games either I won or I dumped the map

Oh, the AI does try to win. I played a chieftain level game lately in which Bismark led a very successful campaign to conquer the world. In my experience (about 15 games total now), the AI can be very good, and has quite some surprises in store - like one of my neighboring civs declaring war on me because I was building too many wonders for their taste.

I know the AI tries to win by conquest, diplomacy and the space race - I have not seen any indications of it trying to win by culture, but then you do not have enough info on them to see if they do.

Globally I really like the new AI because it keeps things interesting :)

I think around game 7 or so I decided to give Ghandi (King) and a cultural victory a chance. I did everything in my power to stay peaceful and try to manipulate the world via diplomacy. Ha ha! Silly me. The Egyptians took a small Russian city and the Russians gave up all their cities for peace. I tried to manipulate my neighbors to work against the evil Egyptians but no dice. The Ottomans, with their army miles away fighting the much weaker Germans, folded like a tent to the Egyptians. At this point I saw the writing on the wall and I got my 3 cities to start building an army but oh too late. The Egyptian riflemen easily breached my 70+ defenses and no one came to my aid. Caesar sent me a message telling me how bad the Egyptians were but next turn dow'd the Small American empire.... While I was staging a last ditch effort at my last city the Egyptians than swallowed the Romans. This only left the Germans who than finally decided to act. They dow'd me!! I was able to take back my capital but the overwhelming Egypian/German forces finally got me.

So I learned my lesson. The diplomacy is absolutly broken. If you want a cultural victory you still
need a real army and to use domination like tactics but just puppet so you don't get the culture
hits. Yes, I lost a match!!! Shhhh, don't tell anyone:P

Lemmy101 did a thread in the Stories and Tales section of his first game, and it showed the AI pulling a victory out that seemed to be unexpected.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=380899

It may not be the best example, but it showed the AI making an adjustment and dealing with the situation it was in.

Quite the opposite infact, the AI has been in a position of power yet made stupid errors like leaving it's capital undefended when out conquering other AI's.

The fact that they were out conquering other AIs proves that they are trying to win. AI vs AI war was very unlikely in previous Civs and rarely led to one Civ dominating a continent. Not quite so in Civ5, although it sucks at intercontinental warfare and thus gets stuck there.

.

I know the AI tries to win by conquest, diplomacy and the space race - I have not seen any indications of it trying to win by culture, but then you do not have enough info on them to see if they do.



Really ? In my games they build sometimes the apollo project, yes. But then no space ship parts ...

And conquest - most time only the continent they sit on, but nothing else.

I lost a couple of games on Immortal and Deity. Not on the lower levels.

Attached below is a replay of a game I lost, my first try at Immortal. Unzip and view in Firefox :)

. AI vs AI war was very unlikely in previous civs .

Surely you jest... AI vs AI war was quite common in 3 and even more so in IV due to religious differences and NOTICEABLE personality differences/civic differences. In case you forgot leaders had a favorite civic and were more or less friendly to others based on their current civics vs others.


As for cultural wins i seriously doubt it.. the fact that all AI are more warmongering pretty much defeats any chance of it. They may formulate the plan to do so and only build 1 or 2 cities but then they inevitably declare war on someone and get wiped out. So i'm rather certain the AI is not actually trying to WIN via culture or science.

A very wise man once said - "The AI in civ V are all brain dead psychos"!!!

Oh wait ...... that was me :mischief:

I lost a couple of games on Immortal and Deity. Not on the lower levels.

Attached below is a replay of a game I lost, my first try at Immortal. Unzip and view in Firefox :)

That's an intersting reply, and it at least shows the AI winning. That's a good thing in my opinion. I guess a lot of it has to do with people quitting before a victory? But that's part of the reason I only reckon that a conquest victory is likely as the AI never seems to shock with a surprise culture, diplomatic or science victory. It's easy to spot the AI heading towards a conquest victory.

I lost to AI twice on Prince. Both times to AI's time victory, and both times when I was trying to get a culutural victory, so I wasnt expanding too much.

In my first game I played on immortal and had a great time.

I first allied with Siam to fight Arabia. Once it was obvious that I would crush Arabia my relations with Siam soured and relativly soon they attacked. It makes perfect sense given that I was ahead in land but behind in army and technology.

They ran over me and the rest of the game I was trying to scheme to prevent them from winning. I think they had build three parts of the spaceship when Iroqious won a cultural victory.

Their actions are very reasonable If you think of them only as competitors. In my second game on Immortal I won a diplomatic victory when Persia had 27+ cultural policies. In my third game I played diety and won a diplomatic victory when two of my opponents had started building the space ship.

Their actions are very reasonable If you think of them only as competitors.

Exactly true.. diplomacy is simply a gameplay dynamic now not a crude geopolitical simulator:cry:

In 2 posts here somebody said, and they attacked me, which made total sense.

Well, of course sometimes it will make sense that they attack. The problem is, they always attack. So it's not that they were smart and saw that attacking was the best option. They always finally do, and in that case, it was reasonable.

Having a warmonger AI is cool. But it's cool if it's unique. But it's not because they all are.

I lost a couple of games on Immortal and Deity. Not on the lower levels.

Attached below is a replay of a game I lost, my first try at Immortal. Unzip and view in Firefox :)

If I'm reading the replay correctly, Augustus had 2 ways of entering your lands via 1-hex-wide narrow path between mountains and ocean? How did you loose?

So I learned my lesson. The diplomacy is absolutly broken. If you want a cultural victory you still
need a real army and to use domination like tactics but just puppet so you don't get the culture
hits. Yes, I lost a match!!! Shhhh, don't tell anyone:P

I won a cultural victory with Gandhi on Emperor. My neighbor Wu Zetian conquered most of the rest of the world, but I managed to stay on her good side. I didn't participate in a single war throughout the whole game, and I don't think I built more than a couple of military units.

Judging from my other games as well (mostly deity now), I feel pretty certain that you can befriend an AI if you put some effort into it.

If I'm reading the replay correctly, Augustus had 2 ways of entering your lands via 1-hex-wide narrow path between mountains and ocean? How did you loose?

Ah, good question. The problem was that I underestimated Augustus. I didn't think of him as a threat when I attacked Hiawatha.

From the replay:

Turn 187 Wu Zetian declares war on Hiawatha!
Turn 219 The Iroquois Civilization has been conquered!!!
Turn 219 Augustus Caesar declares war on Wu Zetian!
Turn 261 Beijing (Wu Zetian) was captured by the Roman Empire!!!
Turn 261 Augustus Caesar has won a Domination Victory!!!

So basically I overstretched myself to finish off Hiawatha, and the same turn I took his last city Ceasar saw he could finish me off. And so he did.

If I'm reading the replay correctly, Augustus had 2 ways of entering your lands via 1-hex-wide narrow path between mountains and ocean? How did you loose?

that's a good question...

I won a cultural victory with Gandhi on Emperor. My neighbor Wu Zetian conquered most of the rest of the world, but I managed to stay on her good side. I didn't participate in a single war throughout the whole game, and I don't think I built more than a couple of military units.

Judging from my other games as well (mostly deity now), I feel pretty certain that you can befriend an AI if you put some effort into it.

I did participate in a war against Egypt with Russia as my ally as she asked for my assistance and Egypt looked to be the stronger of the two. I won my campaign and Egypt offered me all his cities but I declined to take advantage of this game flaw. Russia lost their war and all their cities in the peace settlement. So, yes maybe I should've just been quaker like and participate in no wars at all but I thought I would need to destablilize the stronger aggressive powers to keep a balance in the world as the British foriegn policy was aiming for in Europe in the 18-19th centuries. When Egypt began to get too strong I couldn't find a potential ally on the entire map and I swore to myself to keep a small army and rely on diplomacy and strong Indian defenses. Those two decisions cost me the game. Maybe when the new patch comes out I will try it again but with a no war policy.

I think it depends on what the player is doing. There always seem to be some warmongers who are trying for domination but I dont know about science diplo or cultural victories. I'm actually finally playing a game where i'm being challenged. Am aiming for a cultural victory with India on King with only 2 cities and 3 puppets (got them by abusing elephants). Its definitely in the cards for me as I have 3 1/2 branches complete and am popping a new one every 12 turns.

For most of the game I was able to play powers off each other and have been riding Persia's coattails into battle. Now there are only three civs on my landmass (earth style map), I turned down the latest war and while Persia(1) and Aztecs(3) are fighting it out Germany(2) just declared on me with an army about 4 times my size. Now I'm 2 turns from popping a great scientist which I can grab infantry with (he only has rifles) and the TajMahal for a golden age to pump/buy some units fast. Dont think he can get my reg cities but he has a chance on 2 of the puppets.

I think around game 7 or so I decided to give Ghandi (King) and a cultural victory a chance. I did everything in my power to stay peaceful and try to manipulate the world via diplomacy. Ha ha! Silly me. The Egyptians took a small Russian city and the Russians gave up all their cities for peace. I tried to manipulate my neighbors to work against the evil Egyptians but no dice. The Ottomans, with their army miles away fighting the much weaker Germans, folded like a tent to the Egyptians. At this point I saw the writing on the wall and I got my 3 cities to start building an army but oh too late. The Egyptian riflemen easily breached my 70+ defenses and no one came to my aid. Caesar sent me a message telling me how bad the Egyptians were but next turn dow'd the Small American empire.... While I was staging a last ditch effort at my last city the Egyptians than swallowed the Romans. This only left the Germans who than finally decided to act. They dow'd me!! I was able to take back my capital but the overwhelming Egypian/German forces finally got me.

So I learned my lesson. The diplomacy is absolutly broken. If you want a cultural victory you still
need a real army and to use domination like tactics but just puppet so you don't get the culture
hits. Yes, I lost a match!!! Shhhh, don't tell anyone:P

Im wondering now if aside from Policies that help you get more culture (either direct or happiness based) if its worth it to just stockpile points until you have enough to win. Like does the AI sense that now with 22/30 policies completed that they better do something?

Napoleon AI was going to win by culture in one game until I beat him to it.

Very sneaky too. He had 22 policies but they were spread out over 5 policy trees so it looked like he only completed one. I wouldn't have known/probably lost the game had I not lucked out and that travelling journal popped up showing who the most progressive Civ was (Napoleon)

Very lucky game.

Exactly true.. diplomacy is simply a gameplay dynamic now not a crude geopolitical simulator:cry:

Eh? Civ AI programmed right should want to win. Geopolitics is important up until someone is about to win and even then it can still be used to prevent someone from winning. There's plenty of geopolitical shenanigans to be had for the first 3/4 of the game. I just finished a game where Japan and I fought over a City State over serveral wars. My goal was to contain Japan before they get Samurais, their goal was to expand.

That's geopolitics.

Most people give up when they are losing (cf Sulla's Immortal game), so probably not very many have seen an AI victory.

Anyway wait until the patches fix all the exploits. There'll be losses then.

Napoleon AI was going to win by culture in one game until I beat him to it.

Very sneaky too. He had 22 policies but they were spread out over 5 policy trees so it looked like he only completed one. I wouldn't have known/probably lost the game had I not lucked out and that travelling journal popped up showing who the most progressive Civ was (Napoleon)

Very lucky game.



Eh? Civ AI programmed right should want to win. Geopolitics is important up until someone is about to win and even then it can still be used to prevent someone from winning. There's plenty of geopolitical shenanigans to be had for the first 3/4 of the game. I just finished a game where Japan and I fought over a City State over serveral wars. My goal was to contain Japan before they get Samurais, their goal was to expand.

That's geopolitics.

LoL.. ya you know Canada Attacks the U.S. all the time since we share borders... and everyone hates a country that fights defensive wars only...and Luxembourg has such a tiny military they are at war with everyone cause lacking a decent military means everyone wants to take you out:mischief: Point is they removed the country to country feel to diplomacy and replaced it with player to player diplomacy. Everyone is a player who wants to win.. not a country that wants to survive.

That's an intersting reply, and it at least shows the AI winning. That's a good thing in my opinion. I guess a lot of it has to do with people quitting before a victory? But that's part of the reason I only reckon that a conquest victory is likely as the AI never seems to shock with a surprise culture, diplomatic or science victory. It's easy to spot the AI heading towards a conquest victory.

See the wonderful playthrough by Lemmy101 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=9645463&postcount=388): he lost to AI Wu Zetian who achieved a cultural victory (prince level from what I remember). His reaction shows that it certainly was quite a surprise as he expected a conquest!

^^That was in the first 3 days of the game and even before the game get out outside of the yankee land. I'm pretty sure that lemmy would not lose if it was now.

Anyway, just a point :
Most people give up when they are losing (cf Sulla's Immortal game), so probably not very many have seen an AI victory.

The fact that the human player is pushed out of the board does not mean necessarily that a AI wins ;)

I've had one AI civ beat up the rest of them on pangea maps a couple of times when I was trying to see what would happen if I did not attack early and instead built as many wonders as possible. It actually seems more likely to me that one AI will win than in civ IV where the normal thing was a balance of power among the AI civs. But it does not matter much until they fix the horsemen rush problem. That early strategy is totally dominant for the human player and works too easily.

The AI nations can actually get some of the advantages that a human player gets from the poor AI, such as opponents defending badly and opponents surrendering all their cities. Add to this the AI advantages of generating massive happiness and producing many units and you can get a juggernaut nation on a pangea map. A juggernaut AI nation will tend to declare war on anything nearby and just continue expanding. Left unchecked it could easily win by the Renaissance era

If you go to war with the a juggernaut you find that they tech well because of all the population, they can produce an endless stream of units so it's hard to advance through their territory, their finances don't crash because you're reducing their army maintenance, and you'll probably struggle for happiness once you've conquered perhaps 5 of their 25 cities. You also find yourself without trade partners (all dead) or many city state allies (dead or soon would be). Your only advantage is that they move their units so badly it's often possible to defend yourself without any losses.

bismark kicked my ass in two different games

^^That was in the first 3 days of the game and even before the game get out outside of the yankee land. I'm pretty sure that lemmy would not lose if it was now.

You're right, :worship: Lemmy :worship: wouldn't lose now. It was just a kind of tribute to :worship: Lemmy :worship: who, while giving fun to us all with his brilliant post, also proved that a AI non military victory was possible.
Thanks :worship: Lemmy :worship: !

The AI nations can actually get some of the advantages that a human player gets from the poor AI, such as opponents defending badly and opponents surrendering all their cities. Add to this the AI advantages of generating massive happiness and producing many units and you can get a juggernaut nation on a pangea map. A juggernaut AI nation will tend to declare war on anything nearby and just continue expanding. Left unchecked it could easily win by the Renaissance era

If you go to war with the a juggernaut you find that they tech well because of all the population, they can produce an endless stream of units so it's hard to advance through their territory, their finances don't crash because you're reducing their army maintenance, and you'll probably struggle for happiness once you've conquered perhaps 5 of their 25 cities. You also find yourself without trade partners (all dead) or many city state allies (dead or soon would be). Your only advantage is that they move their units so badly it's often possible to defend yourself without any losses.



in that scenario you typically first encounter conquered ai cities and/or CS's. I typically liberate one city for a conquered civ to get the trading partner back and also their vote if necessary. I always liberate CS's as well. go after a few of those and burn a few and your happiness should stay in check, then just slow your advance as you start mowing over him to keep your happiness better than -10. if it gets really bad you could even start selling some of the conquered cities to your liberated buddy as long as they weren't capitals.

The AI may play to win but it only ever seems to try via Domination - and fails if there is more than a single landmass. I have played over 20+ games (Prince and King not all to complete as they get boring) and I am yet to see an AI win on anything but points (and usually by late game it doesn't build wonders so you can catch up).

Bottom line: the AI is brain dead - diplomatically, tactically, strategically, and in meeting winning conditions.

Rat

I tend to play on a huge Continents map and I find there is always an AI Civ that ends up crushing all other civs on the other continent. But the conquering Civ tends to do a lot of razing. With proper timing, I can usually send 4 or 5 settlers (if I have the extra happiness) on that other continent and start shipping some units overseas to build up enough military presence for an offensive. In one game, half of the overseas continent was deserted (no cities) by 1950 with only Russia remaining and a few City States. I started settling over there by 1960 and I found three barbarian camps, infantery barbarians no less!

I've lost domination victories. I havent lost any other way because on lower difficulties (Emperor and down) I consistently have enough of a lead to not be at any risk of losing, and on higher difficulties I tend to have won or lost by the late Renaissance, before the non-conquest victories become really viable even with the cheats the AI gets.

I've seen the AI come close to a Domination Victory, usually Alexander or Catherine pretty much rolling over half the planet.

In my last game I also saw the AI try to stop me from achieving a Cultural Victory...Elizabeth declared war a couple turns after I completed the 5th policy tree and wouldn't make peace as I plugged away at the Utopia Project. Of course she failed, as Japan's military is unstoppable, especially when your infantry are uber-experienced upgraded Samurai (that, plus having Oligarchy + Himeji Castle + Nationalism).

My infantry were dominating Mechs and Gunships. :D

If I were to rewrite history and count the times I would've lost due to a stronger competant battle ai I would've lost at least 3 times in total. Russia had a tech advantage, huge vast empire and the largest army on the map. Bizmark used his pikemen rush rolling his gray wave of death at me. Only an incompetant ai saved my butt in both matches. If the ai can be fixed and diplomacy improved there might still be hope for this game. Anyone seen an enemy plane yet?!

I haven't played enough games to see the AI get close to winning yet.

However, one time when I was warmongering, Persia and Arabia attacked me, so does that count? Even if Persia's guys died and the Arabs did nothing?

i never finish a game...but i only see Ai fighting continuos war between the others ai player achiving nothing...i've reach the medieval era, but now i'm really bored about press continuosly the next turn button (why all the things cost so much? 50 turns for a barrackS? :| ) , and i'm at the top of the ranking ( i like the point victory above the others)....with praticaly no competitor....

Quicker speed, or you could, you know, improve the land :p

Werent the AI in civ IV mostly pursuing space or cultural victories? I think it would make for a much more interesting game if the AI priorotises these victory types in civ V, since not only are they abysmal at combat tactics with the new combat mechanics BUT they just dont seem to know how to go for a domination win. See attached, save, i won this game on turn 263. (save is on turn 260), difficulty emperor.

Only greece and i have our capitals left, greece way ahead of me in tech, they have artillery + infantry, i have rifles + cannon. See how Alex has got anywhere near my capital and nobody is defending his capital? It just goes to say, the AI doesnt know how to win domination. If not this was the perfect game for the AI to win via a domination. And the AI should have had plenty of time to react, we had been at war for quite some, and he had enough time to buy some units since i had taken at least 4 cities prior to taking Athens.

Regarding the comment that I said the AI declared war on me and it was reasonable regarding that the AI always declared war.

In my first game Siam declared war on me when I was a threat. After we made peace he was happy with me until I stole some land using a great artist. That made him very unhappy.

In my second game I defeated Greece and after that they seemed to have surrendered any hope of wining and we had very good relations for the rest of the game.

I'm running a game atm Archipelago on Deity where the only victory condition is conquest.
Under normal circumstances based on the attached screenshot she could have won, however I'm still playing to see what happens at the end. :)

The most annoying think though, Liz build so many units that takes significant time to process the turn :(

Also she is in Future Era the last 100 or so years, where the majority of the other civs are around the same technological abilities with me.

So let's see if my poor nation will win this game against her with a bit of luck, if I have uranium.

I am yet to see an AI win on anything but points (and usually by late game it doesn't build wonders so you can catch up).

Bottom line: the AI is brain dead - diplomatically, tactically, strategically, and in meeting winning conditions
Typically this type of game :

AI was leading, I won scientific victory (http://cidou.pagesperso-orange.fr/replay02.html), which is kind of a defeat.

Now i'm trying to have the lead (lvl 6 done, lvl 7) in tech, economics, territory, production (=demographic chart), not exploiting AI.

same here, I was playing on emperor level and babylonians entered modern era then I was still laging in medieval, they finally conquered pretty much all the world except me, had several times bigger production capacity and population, but never went for a science victory, nor did some effort to win diplomatically, somehow I don't think AI can ever win culturally,
and obviously they coudn't conquer me either even with much more advanced units..
so finally I was catching up quite well on science, but got bored of the map as I really was supposed to have lost by that time, that didn't seem fair..
so the answer is NO - in the games I played I never seen an AI win, in all the games either I won or I dumped the map

excatly that.

I once saw the chinese starting building up the space ship, but a nuclear bomb took care of it, I wonder if they would have taken off

Yes, emperor standard pangaea