Why is Sciences Funding so unpopular with the AI?

I find Sciences Funding and ISS are both often neglected by the AI.

The ISS is especially rare for me to even see in a game, as it occurs rather late and is not usually put up for a vote unless I'm the one to do it. In fact, I've only see the ISS completed in 1 game so far, and only begun in a game or two more. Yet I've had many, many more games than in G&K go into the Information Era now. So I'd say ISS is also neglected.

But Sciences Funding is ridiculous. In almost every game, virtually every AI will be angry if I propose it, and it never gets passed, while Arts funding is almost always a proposal that will please every AI in the game. And this seems to occur regardless of whether I am a tech leader or am middle of the pack or even in the back of the pack. Just silly; I mean, why such a strong preference for Arts Funding?

I imagine some of this might be patched. AI used to take Rationalism before. Taking Aesthetics when they aren't even going for culture wins is just, well, dumb.

Tachii said:

I imagine some of this might be patched. AI used to take Rationalism before. Taking Aesthetics when they aren't even going for culture wins is just, well, dumb.

Click to expand...

Well, ai cheats with happiness. Maybe it wants to use this cheat and buff to culture in aesthetics tree.

katfish said:

Well, ai cheats with happiness. Maybe it wants to use this cheat and buff to culture in aesthetics tree.

Click to expand...

AI gets a bonus to happiness as it plays on a lower handicap than the human players in most cases. They don't cheat. Cheating would be getting extra happiness with no luxuries or never becoming unhappy.

AI still follows the game mechanics just like everyone else.

Also I don't see how this relates to the comment that the AI likes to pick Aesthetics?

Actually they probably pick Aesthetics to boost their tourism as a defense against ideological unhappiness, which would sink the 'AI cheats with happiness' business.

dexters said:

AI gets a bonus to happiness as it plays on a lower handicap than the human players in most cases. They don't cheat. Cheating would be getting extra happiness with no luxuries or never becoming unhappy.

AI still follows the game mechanics just like everyone else.

Also I don't see how this relates to the comment that the AI likes to pick Aesthetics?

Actually they probably pick Aesthetics to boost their tourism as a defense against ideological unhappiness, which would sink the 'AI cheats with happiness' business.

Click to expand...

I do have to slightly correct you, they actually DO cheat by your definition. How much happiness do you get per luxury? 4 right?

The AI gets 5 per luxury on top of the lower handicap they play on. I know some of this was changed in BNW, but I am not sure to what extent. But that is how it was before.

"Cheat" is a five-letter one-syllable word that conveys how the AI gets a lower "handicap" on even the "normal - AI does not receive any particular advantages" difficulty. It's not textbook use of the word but I think it's a nice shorthand for the advantages the AI gets. It's something they get and humans don't (humans playing on Settler get "cheats" as well, even though they're not actually cheating).

Yzman said:

I do have to slightly correct you, they actually DO cheat by your definition. How much happiness do you get per luxury? 4 right?

The AI gets 5 per luxury on top of the lower handicap they play on. I know some of this was changed in BNW, but I am not sure to what extent. But that is how it was before.

Click to expand...

Huh, no wonder why the AI loves to ICS (I saw the Brazilians and Zulu do that a lot in Prince difficulty) even though having multiple cities like that have heavier penalties of happniess.

Didn't the designers nerfed ICS as encouraging players with smaller number of cities, yet well-developed and highly populated cities late game wise?

My theory is that the AI is just looking at the specialists its currently working and basing its desires on that. So it sees 6 GWAM specialists vs maybe 4 GSEM in the mid-game and calculates there's more benefit to arts funding.

In every BNW game I have played now the AI has been supportive of arts and negative on sciences funding... until they are behind in tech. If I or someone else is the tech leader by a significant margin other civs suddenly start supporting science funding. Its hard to judge how big exactly that gap must get due to the timing of WC voting but apparently the civs want to win culture worse than any other victory.

notyourtypical said:

My theory is that the AI is just looking at the specialists its currently working and basing its desires on that. So it sees 6 GWAM specialists vs maybe 4 GSEM in the mid-game and calculates there's more benefit to arts funding.

Click to expand...

Not exacly.
The AI indeed operates on generating demand and the acting to supply. But there is important factor that AI preferences generally have higher culture than science. Even in generic civs. And it hardly ever drops down. Even if AI is after science AI it not lowers desire for culture. If AI is after war it not drop culture, and not rise science (which will generally help in dominacion).

This is result of old expansion when cultural victory was just a collect tons of culture to get all the trees. The AI havent exacly moved on.

It also result in whole Aesthetic tree which has more about generating culture than generating tourism.