AI doesn't suffer from unhappiness, eliminating the #1 limit to expansion by us players. Thus it only makes sense that many AI leaders spam cities to their heart' content. The only drawback to city spamming from the AI's perspective is lackluster culture, since each city increases the culture threshold for the next policy. So yeah, that's a small price to pay for the benefits of additional otherwise free cities.
Did G&K go too far with enhancing AI settling?
- Thread starter Wodan
- Start date
The AI doesn't suffer as much from lackluster cultural policy acquisition from city spamming as you might think; Chieftain also reduces the amount of culture needed for each policy to 67% of normal. If there's any AI with both the high expansion & high culture flavors on at the same time, it would actually have an easy time getting the new cities to speed up culture policy acquisition.
There is one more cost to going super wide though: It will make building additional national wonders almost impossible.
tomtom5858
Prince
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2013
- Messages
- 320
I just got declared war on the turn after I met Russia (met them on my turn, they declared during their turn). Washington and Oda Nabunaga, both my immediate neighbors, DOWed the turn after.
They "covet my lands" and "think I'm settling cities too aggressively".
4th city was placed on a mediocre turn 68. Russia already has 6 cities on Immortal.
Working as intended I'm sure. Now, I'm not scared of being triple DOWed. But come on Firaxis. Really?
They "covet my lands" and "think I'm settling cities too aggressively".
4th city was placed on a mediocre turn 68. Russia already has 6 cities on Immortal.
Working as intended I'm sure. Now, I'm not scared of being triple DOWed. But come on Firaxis. Really?
tomtom5858
Prince
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2013
- Messages
- 320
Are you complaining that a wide strategy got more cities faster than you going tall or that you got triple DoWed because your army was too small/weak? Either way I don't see this as a faulty AI, rather as faulty game play.
I'm complaining that she DOWed the turn after I met her (the first turn she could), and she's not even remotely close to my empire. I don't see that as realistic behavior.
I was sitting on 6 archers which will be more than sufficient for defense once I upgrade them to CBs. It's not a problem (nor is my army too weak). But that's a separate point and is whatever.
Sorry, I was a little drunk last night and wasn't really very clear
I was sitting on 6 archers which will be more than sufficient for defense once I upgrade them to CBs. It's not a problem (nor is my army too weak). But that's a separate point and is whatever.
Sorry, I was a little drunk last night and wasn't really very clear
Arachnofiend
Perturbed Pugilist
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2012
- Messages
- 1,950
The AI doesn't see 6 archers that will become composite bows in a few turns, they see 6 archers. It's a bit of an oversight but it would be a bit difficult to program behavior like this without letting the AI look at your tech tree and see where you are.
Of course, Firaxis isn't above giving the AI advantages in an attempt to beat the human player's intellectual superiority.
Of course, Firaxis isn't above giving the AI advantages in an attempt to beat the human player's intellectual superiority.
Well the AI does take your gold stack into account, but probably doesn't weight it highly enough. I do wish as well that the AI would be a little more conservative when attacking human players - I'm pretty sure 2 of these AI are going to send something like 2 warriors and 3-4 archers, and the third will probably send nothing at all. It's really just an inconvenience (removes all my trading partners and makes it hard to hook up luxes) at the benefit of gaining exp for my units and weakening my neighbors.
Anyway like I mentioned, the point is, she's nowhere near me and she DOWed me the turn I met her. That seems odd to me. I have never seen this behavior in all my games.
Similar threads
