Questionable AI Decision Making

SnipedSoul

Warlord
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
107
I'm sure no one is surprised to hear that the AI doesn't always make the best decisions in this game. I recently played a game that showcased this in an amusing fashion.

I was playing Peter and found myself on an excellent map. I had marble, stone, gold, tons of food, and tons of hills. Even the tundra was excellent as it was full of sea food, furs, and metals. I had plenty of room to expand as I had blocked Bismarck into his peninsula, and my southern neighbor, Justinian, was expanding away from me.

Justinian founded Buddhism, which quickly spread to me and made us the best of friends. Wang Kon, to Justinian's south, was not interested in Buddhism, however. Wang found himself surrounded by jungle, so his development was slow. There was an absurd amount of food, though, so he hatched a clever plan. He bee-lined CoL, founded Confucianism, adopted the religion, and revolted to Caste. It seemed like a good plan to me. Extra happy + unlimited specialists would take advantage of all that food.

What was questionable about Wang's decision was, of course, that a Buddhist Justinian was his closest neighbor. It wasn't long before a massive stack of Byzantine swords and axes was on the march. Wang Kon's slow start and obsession with Caste System meant he had at most 2 archers per city. Even protective archers are little more than a speed bump when they're outnumbered 10 to 1. After a few turns, the Koreans were no more.

Asoka, who was south of Wang Kon, having just seen his friend get absolutely demolished for daring to adopt a heathen religion, coincidentally popped a great scientist shortly after the Koreans were destroyed! He used this GS to bulb philosophy, which is often a great idea! I had not bothered to get philosophy as I was trying a Paya rush strategy due to my abundant production tiles, gold resource, and the fact that I already had Buddhism.

Asoka, having not yet received Buddhism or the short-lived Confucianism (Justinian razed the holy city :(), decided to adopt Taoism! Again, it wasn't long before another enormous Byzantine army made short work of the heathens (and once again razed the holy city!)

The AI decisions weren't bad, in isolation, but the failure to consider the diplomatic effects of religion was the undoing of both the Korean and the Indian civilizations.

Also, Justinian's decision to raze two holy cities was quite surprising to me. They were awfully far away from his land, but they would surely become worthwhile after building the shrines or even just keeping around for extra :).

Have you noticed any particularly silly things the AI likes to do? Share your stories!
 
I once encountered Toku who was completely surrounded by Stalin's territory, declaring war left right and centre but never negotiating right of passage through Russia. He was just this piñata of XP that never hit back.

I often see massive armies walk into Thebes on an Earth map and then take a peace ransom, whereupon they are stuck in the city by borders. Again, brilliant source of XP (and Wonders) - though make sure you take out the nearby Egyptian cities, or it WILL revolt back (only the initial conquerer can benefit from the 'conquered cities never revolt' setting!).

Oh, and splitting a SoD or running a CGII Archer out of a city to attack a distraction unit (especially a Worker). Or walking a SoD along open ground when there's a ridge of Hills or line of Forests that could prevent multiple Mounted hit & run attacks from nuking all the Siege units.

Tangential pondering: are the religious zealot type AIs more likely to burn a heathen holy city? Or were the HSs in these cases by random chance still at population 1 when they were captured?
 
Have you noticed that the AI likes to use lone siege units to capture your workers? I have encountered far too many guerilla catapults prowling the jungle for helpless workers.

I don't think the holy cities were 1 pop as neither civ had a religion prior to founding one and AFAIK the game tends to found religions in high pop, non-capital cities.
 
The classic "what are they doing" actions:

Declaring war on someone and the next turn voting for the Apostolic Palace to end the war themselves.

Bringing a huge stack which could take cities just by attacking them - but also bringing 1-2 siege units so the huge stack has to stand next to the city and wait until the siege has bombared defenses down to zero (which may not even happen before the war is over). Or until the defender has amassed enough units to counterattack.

Being attacked by Cuirassiers/Cavalry and teching all the way to Electricity while being destroyed instead of getting one of the military techs availabe way before that.

In a recent game I attacked a city defended by three Longbows on a three-tile island. But - two of the Longbows were camped on a tile besides the capital, making an amphibious assault very easy. When the city was taken they suicided on the defender inside. Why?

The AI takes decisions in a much more random way than you think. Wang Kon didn't beeline Caste because he saw a lot of food, just as the AI never thinks about diplomatic relations when adopting a religion or civic.
 
Yeah, Wang Kon probably just wanted to get a Holy City, feeding specialists and not angering his zealot neighbour would have been the last things on his mind.
 
The caste system civic is Wang Kon's favourite civic. That's probably the main reason to research CoL.
Not only the AI makes bad decisions, the human player should have stopped a potential runaway civ while possible or at least decimate them.
There's always a runaway civ in every game and sometimes you have no choice to go to war with them (offensive or defensive) before they vassalize the whole world.
 
Yeah, Wang Kon probably just wanted to get a Holy City, feeding specialists and not angering his zealot neighbour would have been the last things on his mind.

:lol:

This is certainly accurate! It WAS the last thing on his mind.

"Dayum! Angered the zealot neighbor!!!! <gasp...gurgle>"
 
Declaring war on someone and the next turn voting for the Apostolic Palace to end the war themselves.

Oh wow. I launched my SS on a OCC and then Shaka next door nuked me. The whole world DOW'd on me as well. My army fought off two Zulu stacks that had tech parity and the third was at the city gates. UN Chair Monty said 'We'd rather win the game, thank you very much' when I asked for a ceasefire. Then next turn he sends in peacekeepers! :D
 
For me, it was always when they changed siege to not be able to kill but forgot to change the AI programming to utilize that fact, so the AI would continue to send out large stacks of JUST siege units expecting that they could actually kill something.
That fleet catches you by surprise only for you to start laughing when 8 cats come ashore without any unit that can actually kill or capture anything.
 
^ I wonder if this sometimes occurs as a result of a Privateer taking out a ship or two of combat forces. Or a build army - build fleet that can carry army - load fleet - sail to war mismatch. I never see pure siege stacks coming at me by land.
 
I think one of the Better AI mods or K-Mod will fix most of these AI stupidities. The K-Mod AI feels a lot more like mutiplayer vs. a somewhat logical human.
 
While not quite that, yes, K-Mod is much more entertaining because of all the tweaks.
 
^Or a build army - build fleet that can carry army - load fleet - sail to war mismatch. I never see pure siege stacks coming at me by land.

I think this definitely has something to do with it. I think there's a clue in the way loading stacks onto ships works. If you select a large stack of mixed troops and load them onto ships, have you ever noticed that it always loads seige units first? I suspect that the same mechanic must be in place for the AI. They may have a nice assortment of troops, but say only two galleons. They try to load all their troops, and then end up only loading six catapults. It's just a guess though, I haven't actually looked into the code to find out.
 
Can we talk about the city placement? I'm playing a Big and Small map right now and there are like 3 canal sites where ship movement time around the whole map would be made so much easier, and they build 1 or 2 tiles away from every single one!

It caused almost a physical pain seeing this.
 
I'm sure possible canal opportunities are not a factor in the AI city placement logic. (or at least reasonably sure and waiting for a code geek to show up and go NA NA NA NA NA)
 
About a third of Earth games I have to raze if I want Suez or Panama -.-

Not as annoying, though, as when they settle ON A GOLD HILL. That's a site I want to be developed when I move in, not just plonk down a placeholder that'll let me redeploy naval.
 
A perfect example of poor Ai decision making is researching Astronomy on a Pangaea map when the Ai Civ has no coastal cities.
 
A perfect example of poor Ai decision making is researching Astronomy on a Pangaea map when the Ai Civ has no coastal cities.

Huh? Observatories give you a refund and then return on your beaker investment, and then you've got SciMeth to see where the Oil is, and a further beaker refund from your Physics GS. Plus, tradebait with your coastal acquaintances.
 
Apparently I like story time, so I spoilered this because it's longer that I thought it'd be.

Spoiler :
I'm fairly new to the game and have only rudimentary awareness of diplomatic tactics, but one game I played a day or two ago kind of struck me as dumb. I was playing Noble on Pangaea but it was one of the ones that had narrow peninsulas all around: i was on one to the south, Shaka to the southwest (so my immediate west), Izzy up on a wide one alone Northwest, Giggles and Zara alone on another lobe to the east forming a sort of horseshoe with Monty at the south tip, just across the water from me to the east, with Mansa smack dab in the middle of everything.

So the set up is I'm neighbors with two of the most famous warmongers of the game (though one can't get to me directly) and there is at least one religious fanatic + a couple others that really like religions that might convert the dangerous neighbor. I was actually dicking around in this game, letting the auto production build whatever for a long time, just to see what it thinks it needs to do. I managed to get a few wonders playing as the Industrious Roosevelt, including Great Lighthouse, Colossus AND Masoluem of Mausollos or however you spell that, so I had a decent economy to tech with despite watching the AI building things like triremes/caravels and research instead of any troops whatsoever.

Monty was threatening me left and right, Shaka made a demand or two (that I immediately agreed to, nervously) but none of the pricks on the map were willing to war with any of their neighbors, only those who were across the map from them and blocked off by other civs. Well that does me no good to try to sic Shaka on Monty if he has to go through Mansa and Zara to get there does it? Meanwhile Isabella had converted Mansa to Buddhism and he LOVES her just fine, so nothing there. Zara will attack Gilgamesh, but not Monty or Mansa even though all three border him and Gilgamesh is the same the religion (Judaism) as him! Things are quickly looking grim if I can't bribe Shaka *somewhere* other than at me, as he's roaming around with Chariots and Catapults everywhere but doing nothing for the moment. If Isabella converts him there's no siccing him on anybody else even if I also go Buddhism, as I'm by far his weakest neighbor.

So anyway, I found Confucianism with the Oracle and send my missionary straight to Shaka, knowing if nothing else it will at least buy me a slightly better chance to sic him on somebody else. I can't believe it; Isabella hasn't spread baldies to any city of his yet at all! Yes! He converts next turn and suddenly now he's willing to attack Izzy for cheap, so I send him on his way. In the meantime, Zara decides on his own that there can be only one defender of the Jewish faith and starts stomping Giggles something fierce, all the while Monty is trapped behind Zara's closed border and threatening me ineffectually to no end. I eventually bribed Zara onto him after Monty declared war on his own once and big green put him in his place, wiping him down to 2 cities before I had to bribe him OFF to prevent a capitulation when I saw him approaching Feudalism.

That's not the dumb part. That comes after Shaka marches off his massive 25+unit stack toward Izzy and gets utterly wrecked, losing 1 of his only 4 cities at the moment to her and calling it quits. This peace lasts about 5 turns before I notice that Shaka's red fist has popped up and sure enough, he's massed on my border now with about 20 chariots and 8 or so catapults. He declares the next turn after I spotted it and I go into emergency whip mode, slamming out Macemen from every city in order to absorb as much of that stack as I can in the 3 turns it takes to march on Washington. Shaka apparently bit off a lot more than he thought he could chew, and was not expecting such a huge tech disparity in military or didn't care. I ripped into his stack as it walked to Washington (luckily my dumb auto workers did something helpful for once, and roaded damn near every tile around in my terriotory, so that was nice), he threw it against the 2 maces I had stacked in there and lost about half of it, then immediately called it quits. Ha! Score one for the noob!

The ceasefire takes him back inside his own borders and he marches off in two turns to pick the war back up with Izzy all of his own accord. But I'm pissed now, and stay in war mode massing maces and trebuchets on his border until I'm rocking a stack as big as his was at least, giving him a few turns to march away, and then promptly overrun him with Izzy marching in pillaging right behind, refusing to give up her revenge either this time. Sweet justice! And from then on, with his further 5 cities and more devious diplomacy, I end up uniting with Mansa/Izzy, turning Mansa on Zara who decides he wants to be Christian and bully his neighbors now that they're a different faith now. I proceed to pick the rest of them apart one at time teching up through Knights> Cuirassiers>Cavalry, vassaling each in turn before massing cavalry to overrun Mansa in 4 turns flat. I end up taking an increasing number of cities each turn (1, then 2, then 3...). The best part was none of my vassals did anything except fumble about, and he bribed in Izzy later (of course, because I couldn't drive a wedge between them at all) but my counter attack against her caused her to be willing to capitulate in the same turn when I wiped her stack and took a border city. The hilarious bit was she couldn't because she had just declared that turn, so she had to suffer through losing the entirety of her only ally, all of her military might and another city before she was able to give in.

What I don't understand is how an AI that wasn't plotting on me beforehand could change his mind in the middle of war, cancel it, and decide that after being thrashed once, that taking on an even more advanced target was a good idea. Especially the one that just bribed him a little over 10 turns ago and is his best friend in the world. I mean, I understand that like most warmongers he can plot at Pleased readily but it's like the AI took into no account the fact that my military tech was so much more advanced or the fact that he should hate Izzy more than me because of our shared faith...but noooooo, it just looks at the lying power comparison, decides I'm somehow an easier target, and stabs me in the back despite the fact he was going to (and did) get stomped into oblivion for his trouble. That's pretty dumb to me.
 
AI using its tactical nukes against my vassal's island cities while my massive stack marches on its capital
 
Top Bottom