Is the AI insane

Beat the crap out of Americans - left them out of pity with only their capital and some land.

Meanwhile, I had a run in this Sweden - just as I let them surrender, the United States attacks me with everything including the kitchen sink (archers, cross-bows, minute men, cannons) just a load of junk. It was like the gates of hell opened and 20+ troops swarmed upon New York.

I had (artillery, WWI infantry, Gatling guns, tanks and aircraft). but was 5 turns away so they captured New York, but I still had to go back and go after the United States and to punish him, I took out Washington.

But what I do not understand that if Washington had not bother me with declaring war, they would have been left alone - are they nuts ??

Suddenly, all the other AI got on their high horses and called me a war monger (hey, I just wanted a simple game - I do not attack unless attacked first) and everyone declare war on me.

But, I noticed that if you kill a capital, it seems to set off a whole bunch of AI's.

Wondering how a country with only one city can afford 20+ troops.

Same with Sweden, after taking care of the United States, Sweden, with two cities left re-attacks me with modern weapons (this was only like 30 turns after the surrender).

Before the surrender, the best they had was cross-bows, now 30 turns later, WWI tanks, aircraft, troops. My spies told me they had no oil so how did the AI get modern equipment and not only equipment but enough for 4 tanks, 2 gatling guns, one bomber, one fighter and a flak gun (plus a whole bunch of battleships).

I figure I have 7 turns till I get WWII bombers so I have been stockpiling WWI aircraft but just for the hell of I I have been burning down all the cities I have captured. Using the money from these cities (selling building) to build-up my reserves.

Do not have a chance to win, but I will go down fighting.

It's not taking a capital that gets you called a warmonger I believe (though it does make the civ in question very upset)- it's wiping out the entire civ down to the last city. I prefer to take a civ's capital and productive cities and leave them with their most tiny and useless city, so they're less likely to redevelop into a threat.

In my current conquest game with Arabia, all that remains of America is the meager city of Atlanta surrounded entirely by my civ, and mighty Rome has been reduced to one of those worthless tundra cities the AI likes to settle (appropriately enough, its name is Ravenna.) Korea was actually left with a fairly decent city due to Rome capturing their smaller ones, so they may become a problem. Conveniently these mini-civs seem to be squabbling among themselves, so I may be able to goad Korea into conquering Atlanta, then take their other city to make sure they can't come after me.

Yes, the AI is complete nonsense in regard to this matter:
- You're a warmonger even if they have DoW'ed someone 10 times more than you have.
- They will hate you if you eliminate someone who attacks you but won't give a rats ass if you leave them one tiny city on a remote island.
- They will attack you if they have the slightest chance of a small-time gain even if long-term elimination is inevitable if they declare war.

That's some impressive coding in action there.

The AI is completely and utterly insane. Any attempts to rationalise its behaviour will ultimately be futile.

terveurn said:

Is the AI insane

Click to expand...

By definition, the AI is neither sane nor insane. It's just an over-complexified pocket calculator. It will add 0s and 1s and then decide whether to attack you.
In your example, America saw an opportunity to reconquer one of it's previous cities and attacked. Long term consequences are far behind it's "comprehension".

kaspergm said:

- You're a warmonger even if they have DoW'ed someone 10 times more than you have.
- They will hate you if you eliminate someone who attacks you but won't give a rats ass if you leave them one tiny city on a remote island.

Click to expand...

Well, DoW is only part of the equation as you stated in the second post. Also, they are probably regarded as Warmongers by other civs as well. Nothing exclusive there.

- They will attack you if they have the slightest chance of a small-time gain even if long-term elimination is inevitable if they declare war.

Click to expand...

Some civs are more likely to attack than others. There is a "boldness" factor in AI "personalities". Would be interesting to look at Georges' data

That's some impressive coding in action there.

Click to expand...

Maybe you should propose your services to Firaxis if you can code some better AI Don't want to be mean, but so many people complain about poor AI while they could not code a tic-tac-too AI ( i couldn't code a tic-tac-too AI either so don't feel insulted)

Maybe you should propose your services to Firaxis if you can code some better AI Don't want to be mean, but so many people complain about poor AI while they could not code a tic-tac-too AI ( i couldn't code a tic-tac-too AI either so don't feel insulted)


Bob: been programming since computers were breadboard and every-time you wanted to print you had to hardwire the board (and it was a 18" x 18" pin board) - I remember when PASCAL was new and BASIC got everyone excited. I remember when getting a computer was ordering a kit and putting it together. And yeah, I can program a game of tic-tac-toe as well as Wumpus (I can also upgrade Windows by myself).

Do not know how long you have been around, but some of use old people still like to get out of the old folks home and play games (if that's OK with you kindergarteners).

* * *

azzaman - I thought resistance was futile ??

* * *

So I guess the motto is to encapsulate (or isolate) one city for each AI....

kaspergm said:

- They will attack you if they have the slightest chance of a small-time gain even if long-term elimination is inevitable if they declare war.

Click to expand...

I've seen the tipping point for an AI to attack me, be just leaving a worker or a scout out where their skulking assault forces can get an easy capture/kill with a sneak attack on it. The temptation to get that easy, small-time gain of a worthless kill is enough for them to leap headlong into their own destruction, frequently. And once in a war, they'll sacrifice 3 or 4 units just to kill one of yours. <shakes head>

Bonkers AI.
On Emperor, Aztecs with only 2 cities bring 5 archers, 5 jaguars, catapults, 3 knights, several horsemen and chariot archers on me. And the flow never ends, despite you killing their units, until they take your city - as if each AI city produces a few units every turn.
Also, AI hurries production in puppet cities and regularly gets units from non-militaristic friends/allies.
CHEATING.

I just got out of a game where Bismark was completely dominating his part of the map. He was friendly with me the whole time, but when I DoW Japan, he puts his grumpy face on and denounces me. I just laughed... must be one of those "Do as I say, not as I do" situations.

Came back around though... later on, he gets DoWed by me, three other AI, and about 9 city-states

Bob Morane said:

Maybe you should propose your services to Firaxis if you can code some better AI Don't want to be mean, but so many people complain about poor AI while they could not code a tic-tac-too AI ( i couldn't code a tic-tac-too AI either so don't feel insulted)

Click to expand...

Ok, maybe coding was a bad choice of word. I should have said game design.

That being said, my point still stands. I'm not a programmer, so I couldn't do the coding, but after all, the code only does what the game designer wants it to do (unless it's bugged of course, but that's not what we're discussing here), and I'm quite confident that I could come up with a better game design in this area. After all, the example that you get the warmonger label for declaring war more than one time no matter the circumstances isn't exactly hard to best, and I wouldn't even say that you have to be a genious to come up with a more nuanced and sensible set of conditions that could be coded fairly easily.

terveurn said:

Do not have a chance to win, but I will go down fighting.

Click to expand...

Before I go to detail explaining AI behaviour. I need to know, did u loose the game after all?

CivKing5:

Put it on the back burner - got so frustrated that I had to start another.

I'll be back do a few rounds and see how long I last - might get interesting when I get WWII bombers but one of the AI is ahead of me (in tech).

Aviation is a game changer - if I had a chance at stealth I know I can beat the other AI (I have the production capacity).

AI is programmed to play like a human player. And yes it is sometimes irrational but defenatly not broken. I bet when Washington attacked you it started the attack with a line like this; " I know that I don't have a chance, but I try anyway." Am I right?

I think an improvement would be allying with other civs. This would mean warmongers that everybody hates but hasn't got the guts to attack will not just be hated by everyone but will be defended against aggressively- attack is the best form of defense. Some times. I don't mean when all of the AI just attacks you randomly but like third person requests, but more powerful and the Ai works with itself or you i.e. if Russia and Germany were fighting England and Russia didn't have the units to take down a english city they are attacking they will let Germany take it and go do something useful instead of siting around getting slaughtered by the city.

terveurn said:

CivKing5:

Put it on the back burner - got so frustrated that I had to start another.

I'll be back do a few rounds and see how long I last - might get interesting when I get WWII bombers but one of the AI is ahead of me (in tech).

Aviation is a game changer - if I had a chance at stealth I know I can beat the other AI (I have the production capacity).

Click to expand...

<me smiles at Terv>

I remember a few days back, you were posting how the game was stupid, screwed up, and you were about to give up because it didn't make any sense. Not a put-down, I've had a few of those moments back in my time, too... lol! Now it appears that you are learning things fast and kinda digging it. Game sucks you in, doesn't it?

In my experience, you can eliminate Civs without getting the warmonger penalty or denounced. Relationships matter.

In addition there is no 2 DOW limit.

This is all Emperor and below. Immortal and Diety I have no experience with :

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=11920399&postcount=26

Yep, pretty much.

Smokeybear

Still pissed that 11 cannons can not beat-up 1 exposed infantry unit

Civ has always sucked me in, one of the reasons I have played it on and off for more then 20 years

Never said the game sucked or was screwed-up -- but I know the AI cheats (like how the hell does 1 city end-up with 20+ units when it has no means of support)

How does Sweden with 2 cities and no oil end up with 2 aircraft and 2 tanks ?

There is still parts of Civ 2 that I like a whole lot better then Civ 5

ANOTHER ONE!!!!

My 3 Artilleries and one tank CANNOT kill an enemy infantry which is located (not fortified) on an empty hill on MY territory!!!! I have +15% ATTACK BONUS, plus +10% adjustent unit attack bonus. My each Artillery does 8-7 damage only!!! Tank does 15-20 damage, GETS 30.

HORRIBLE STUFF!!! And this is only on EMPEROR, what happens next?!?
I am not mentioning that there is no end to AI units comings towards the player - even if you manage to kill 5, another 10 appear, and so on, without an end.

DEFINITELY LOTS OF BUGS AGAIN.

Screw these lazy developers.

Does the AI have some type programming that modifies it's behavior after it loses a city? That would explain it's predisposition to found cities on the same spot you razed a previous one. If so, maybe it does some type of calculation and concludes the odds won't be any more favorable? At that point, you've eclipsed him in tech, you've just finished a war and hopefully depleted troop supplies, you've now made peace and are going to start resupplying your ranks. Meanwhile, he's built up an army of 20 units, has one pathetic city not producing enough science to catch up. Since you said NY, I think that is the 2nd American city? I'm guessing it was a decent city and in his eyes the best chance he had to establish a foothold and regain some respectability.

Maybe I'm being too optimistic but if I was playing against you, that'd be my thought. I've had games with a runaway civ where I knew my chances weren't great but if I waited any longer they'd only get worse. Kinda the "you may whoop me but at least I'll ruin that fancy shirt of yours when I bleed all over it."