AI wont build my tanks arrrrggggg

After months creating the perfect game for me to play, im about to have a brain meltdown to think that i have to redo it all

All is good till i get to the modern era. I added modern marines to upgrade from marines with an attack of 18. I wanted that to be a choice for civs that never got petrol to make tanks, and maybe the AI to build them once in a while.

I added anti-tank, snipers, spec ops, and helicopters, all with similar attack values but different stealth attack options when attacking a stack of units, and surprisingly the AI builds a mix of them all.

Good so far but now they wont build my darn tanks.... I increased my tank attack but its not really balanced, and yet they dont build them

I think the AI treats my infantry as if it were the same unit since they got the same attack value with diff flags. I just hate the AI just building the 'best' offensive unit only.

To think of all the work i gotta do now wow. I added so many units!

Im just gonna fix it with auto production i guess... I added spies to my game with auto-production from the Intelligence Agency building and its fun as heck.

The AI is more lkely to build expensive units iirc. So maybe giving the Tanks a higher cost might actually help.

Yoda Power said:

The AI is more lkely to build expensive units iirc. So maybe giving the Tanks a higher cost might actually help.

Click to expand...

I didn't know that. I thought the AI was inclined to build cheaper units.
What does iirc stand for?

If I remember correctly - iirc.

Apparently the mechanism is that the AI is programmed to think that expensive = good.

My Modern marines cost 120 shields, and got 18 attack 12 defense. My tanks cost 360 shields and got 24 attack and 12 defense. Its building marines only. Could it be actually calculating that getting 3 marines =360 shields, 54 combined attack power, while getting a tank for the same value of 350 shields their are only getting the 24 attack power from one unit?

U get me? I think the AI might be calculating in shield value:

1 tank= 360 shields = 24 attack power
3 marines= 360 shields = 54 attack power

Therefore 3 marines have a higher shield value. Now when i compare the games standard specs

1 tank = 200 shields = 24 attack power
2 Tow infantry = 240 sheilds = 24 attack power

therefore 1 tank has a higher shield value cuz u can get more AP with less shields?

Obviously 1 on 1 the tank its stronger, but i think the AI might be calculating efficiency in the long run and taking the unit that gives more bang for the buck when they compare it pound by pound in shield cost.

I dont know if this is whats happening but i got a feeling it might be because this started happening when i increased the cost of my tanks, while also increasing the attack power of my marines, and as a result they now build no tanks

This means a single tank will need to have a whooping 55 attack power to compensate and then be stronger than 3 infantries with 54 attack power and the same shield value, or increase the cost of the marines so that 360 shields (marines combined) is less than 54 AP when compared to a tank with
54 AP/360 shields. I think i might be up to something and im gonna test it. My theory works flawless if u take into account the stats of my units, unless it might have been a strange coincidence.

So in conclusion i think the AI builds the unit that has the highest [AP per shield] value, or what we call pound for pound value in America. Im gonna test it out and see...

I think i would have to decrease the cost of the tank, or increase its attack power over 54, or decrease marine attack power, or increase marine cost to make the tank win the pound by pound competition.

Thanks for mentioning the AI calculates in shields. I wouldnt know wtheck was going on lol

ZergMazter said:

Thanks for mentioning the AI calculates in shields. I wouldnt know wtheck was going on lol

Click to expand...

No problem. But you do realize that you reached the opposite conclusion from what I wrote? You might be right though, it's been so long since I saw any tests on this.

I think there is some thread floating around with pretty accurate calculations on what the AI builds. And as far as I remember the conclusion was that higher cost makes the AI build them more often.

AI strategy flags probably also play a role.

Did you give your tanks the "offensive" tactics? What tactics did you give to your marines? Did you set the tanks to be built by the civs that should build those tanks?
Do the tanks need resources that are not available for them?

You see, there are many other flags in the settings to cheque for your question, why the AI doesn´t build tanks.

I don´t think the AI has a preferency to build the more expensive units. It has a preferency to build the units with the best defense and -especially - with the best offensive values.

Yes civinator. That is my impression too, but i think the AI calculates offensive value along with shield cost. For example:

1- 50 attack Tank, 300 shield cost
2- 50 attack Tank, 250 shield cost

We can agree here that the AI will build option 2. I think the AI works like a calculator. Now lets take option 2 and do this:

50 attack, 250 shield -/- 2 = 25 attack, 125 shield

In the AI's eyes 25/125 would be = to 50/250 went trying to solve which one is of higher efficiency in the mathematical problem 50/300 (> or<) 50/250.

Therefore when you see the mathematical problem 50/300 vs 25/125, the AI is actually seeing 50/300 vs 50/250 because to the AI 50/250=25/125, so while the human answer will change the AI's will stay the same.

The AI will say in the problem 50/300 vs 50/250 = 50/250 is the most efficient. Humans agree
The AI will say in the problem 50/300 vs 25/125 = 25/125 is the most efficient. Humans dont agree

The AI cant tell the difference between 50/250 and 25/125. It is of the same value to the AI.

To understand this we must see things like the AI would. I've been out of high school for way too long so dont quote me right on this. I think the AI is using simplification in its math. If you look at it this way then you would understand why its choosing to make my infantry over tanks.

Flags are the same as the standards game. The only thing different i did was change the power and shield values. Im sure of this lol. I got the habit of triple checking things.

That would also explain why the AI in the standard game builds Aegis cruiser over Battleship. Cost value vs power value. Flags might only add minor value to it, but still the big game changer is the shield/power ratio.

Hidden nationality is the strongest flag its been said but notice how the AI stops building pirate ships after ironclads arrive. Even tho its supposed to be a strong flag its strength value isnt as valuable as the shield/power ratio is. When we make Hidden national units with low damage and cost, if you apply this math u might find out why the AI might be choosing to build it over our other units due to the shield/power ratio being higher in value than the other available units. Not knowing the AI used simplification we would just keep making units with the wrong values and the AI would spam build what it looks to be 'lower efficiency' units to us.

All this fits perfect with the stats and with whats been going on with my game. I will test this after work and share my details. Maybe its more than a hypothesis.

I'm going to run some tests on this ... and try to determine how the AI decides which units to build...

Oops throw defensive value in as well lol i forgot. It might affect as in

50ap/1d/300shield
50ap/2d/300shield = They might want to build this one.

Im gonna test AP first, then add diff Defense values and see how it interacts.

You could also try giving the tanks flags like "Amphibious", "Hidden Nationality" etc. It could be that AI finds such units more valuable.

Lionic said:

You could also try giving the tanks flags like "Amphibious", "Hidden Nationality" etc. It could be that AI finds such units more valuable.

Click to expand...

I could keep throwing flags at them till they are chosen in the build que. I'll be creating another problem by solving one which isnt good to me. The result of that would be:

1- The AI will never have a tank army because they use Hidden nationals immediately. So they will continuously wipe out their tanks. As a result the human player will roll thru them like a roller rolls pizza dough.

2- It takes away the functionality of units that were created for that role.

3- Imagine playing every game and every game be the same with the sole purpose of building 'Hulk' units. Boring, every unit must be good at something, but also have a weakness.

Sure playing civ 3 at first I wouldnt mind wining games by rolling in tanks with no need to use any strategies. After 11 years it gets old, and you want something more in depth that doesnt play like command and conquer. More diplomacy, more realism, more challenge that doesnt involve the AI cheating, etc etc...

Recently i managed to get the AI to build anti-tank units even tho they could build way better offensive units. As a result when i tried to kill them, they first sent in their anti-tank units to stealth attack my broken tanks 1 by 1, then sent in their most powerful units to finish me off. Sure they didnt finish me off, but the tanks that needed to repair didnt make it out, so i couldnt heal them, cutting off potential reinforcements. Thats what i call challenge! If you randomly throw flags in you defeat this purpose, and the AI will choose the strongest unit only.

I noticed how the AI evenly built frigates and pirates in the late Med age, even tho they were both offensive units the AI didnt only choose the strongest. It chooses to build both. I tried to recreate this later in the game playing with the stats and i got it to work with anti-tanks.

One thing I do for "stand-in" units of they type you mention, namely that they are so that a civ has SOMETHING if they don't luck out in the strategic resource department, is have them upgrade to the better unit that requires the resource, but leave the "upgrade unit" flag unchecked (unless it's before the final era), that way they can build the AT Infantry or whatever else is standing in for the tank if they don't have oil or aluminum, for example, but when they DO have oil and aluminum, they'll only be able to build tanks.

So far, that strategy has worked out fairly well for me (not 100%, of course, but most of the time).

... *sigh* ...

Honestly, I really don't enjoy digging up the Hoary Past as much as I do, but nonetheless feel, once again, compelled to suggest the following as (lengthy) reading:

The Big Question - How Does The AI Choose Which Units To Build?

,

z

That thread was more than ten years ago?

Yoda Power said:

That thread was more than ten years ago?

Click to expand...

Which makes me think a "zombie/undead," um, "smiley" might come in handy.

Can you resume it in a sentence lol? I kept scrolling down and it never ended