AI blatantly cheating on tech?

[CivAddict2013]

Okay, I had this game as Ethiopia. Went full rationalism. Tons of research agreements. King difficulty.

Bismarck is WAAAAAAAAAAAAY ahead in tech of everybody; with little to no justification for it. Everybody hates him; so he can't get research agreements.

I look at his population and it's all low.

How is Bismarck so ahead in tech? Like I said, I've gone full rationalism and have tons of research agreements, with a public school in all my cities.

How is Bismarck getting so ahead in tech?

 

[LoneRebel]

Although this is another of "those threads", you're right for once about the AI "blatantly cheating" on something.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=525382&highlight=default+handicap

As of BNW, the AI no longer plays on Chieftain, but on a new custom setting made just for them, called the "AI default handicap."

According to the above thread, the AI apparently gets a 15% discount on all technology costs always. Essentially, all technologies only cost 85% of their normal cost to the AI. No matter what difficulty level you pick. To put that into perspective, that discount is even greater than what a human playing on Settler gets.

 

[CivAddict2013]

Although this is another of "those threads", you're right for once about the AI "blatantly cheating" on something.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=525382&highlight=default+handicap

As of BNW, the AI no longer plays on Chieftain, but on a new custom setting made just for them, called the "AI default handicap."

According to the above thread, the AI apparently gets a 15% discount on all technology costs always. Essentially, all technologies only cost 85% of their normal cost to the AI. No matter what difficulty level you pick. To put that into perspective, that discount is even greater than what a human playing on Settler gets.

I know they get a discount on technology.

I'm shocked because in all my games, I have never seen an AI cheat this badly.

Germany has like 12 cities, is in negative happiness, every hates him and he's still far ahead in tech.

Most of the time I can easily get ahead of the AI on King.

Something isn't right for Germany to have such a big empire and still be the lead in tech.

He's not allied with any Maritime city states.

The only solution I can come to is that Germany is cheating. He must not suffer the same science penalty per city like the player or something.

He entered the Atomic Era around 1850 something. Nothing justifies him being that ahead in tech.

 

[LoneRebel]

What, so Germany alone is using some kind of cheat that all the other AIs aren't? As you mentioned, he's ahead of the other AIs too, not just you.

 

[Gamewizard]

Did he go rationalism as well? Order? Lots of observatories?

Bismark likes science victory, so I am not surprised he is ahead in tech.

 

[joncnunn]

AI Bismark's science flavor is actually set properly; unlike most of the AIs.

It's not number of cities or population that give you science but instead it's building science buildings; which most AI flavors don't put a high enough priority on.

BNW also added the science handicap to all AIs; AIs Catherine & Iroquois would really suffer without it as they'd be reducing their science rate with every city they founded.

 

[reddishrecue]

The AI will have a good lead in these higher difficulties but you can eventually catch up if you make more priorities for science. Scientist specialist, science buildings, and any other thing that can get more science could help you catch up to the AIs. Trust, if you;re in the last places in literacy then you could eventually end up in the first places if you also get rationalism social policy.

 

[Ryika]

Something isn't right for Germany to have such a big empire and still be the lead in tech.

Having a big empire equals great science, the additional research cost is easily countered by growing these cities and using science buildings. As the AI doesn't know how to use Great Persons and Specialists properly and their emphasis on growing cities just isn't that great, tall civs will fall ahead (edit: obviously I meant they "fall behind" x.x)later on and the civ that has spread the most will almost always be a the tech leader, as long as their leader has a somewhat decent Science Emphasis. Bismarck can go up to 9 (on a scale of 1-10), so he's probably rolled a high number + he's had a good start. So overall it's just a runaway-civ, he got ahead, nobody was able to stop him, so he got ahead even further.

 

[danaphanous]

Having a big empire equals great science, the additional research cost is easily countered by growing these cities and using science buildings. As the AI doesn't know how to use Great Persons and Specialists properly and their emphasis on growing cities just isn't that great, tall civs will fall ahead later on and the civ that has spread the most will almost always be a the tech leader, as long as their leader has a somewhat decent Science Emphasis. Bismarck can go up to 9 (on a scale of 1-10), so he's probably rolled a high number + he's had a good start. So overall it's just a runaway-civ, he got ahead, nobody was able to stop him, so he got ahead even further.

yup. This is how I steamroll the AI too. The small/tall AI start ahead, I catch up renaissance. And about the advent of the industrial my huge empire and growth starts outstripping everyone. More cities = massively better science if you play the game right. Just found them all before too late and they'll easily overcome science penalties. Especially on huge. My last game as tall/wide India I topped 7500 science/turn which is an information tech every 2-3 turns. Wide is the most powerful strategy for shear science output. I think I read that a small Babylon/Korea game can end quicker but only because the game ends before a truly wide empire reaches its full potential. If it was a bit longer no one would be arguing that small could be better...because it isn't. You will slow down in the end techs if you stay small, about around where your cities are struggling to grow further...whereas a wide game you'll get nothing but better as so many cities are growing at the same time.

 

[Magean]

Bismarck AI has always been strong in science. Because of its priorities, as has been said. Science buildings + expansion.

A wide empire only slows science down when cities don't grow. Since AIs get free happiness, they can grow their numerous cities and largely overcome the science penalty. Wide AIs will have a larger population and more specialist slots than tall AIs.

This is why, in my games, the AI tech leaders tend to have wide empires. Hiawatha or Pocatello, with their ICS, don't even need a high science priority. Actually, Hiawatha has one of the lowest science priorities. Yet he does well in science.

On the other hand, Nebuchadnezzar has a high science priority, but goes very tall and usually fall behind in most of the games he's in.

 

[Camikaze]

You know what would be useful? A save, or some screenshots. Then people would be able to tell you exactly what's happening. If you ever want to clear up your confusion with the game, you might consider giving people more to work with.

 

[CivAddict2013]

Did he go rationalism as well? Order? Lots of observatories?

Bismark likes science victory, so I am not surprised he is ahead in tech.

I don't know. But I've never seen an AI perform that way. Usually I'm only a few techs behind, but Bismarck is way ahead. Not only that but he has a larger empire.

I think my problem was that I went a little wide.

I think that the AI can go wide and stay ahead in tech because the insane bonuses. But when the player does it, it's almost impossible.

I played another game as Ethiopia with 4 cities and was way ahead in tech.

So that's probably where I went wrong.

 

[Magean]

At king difficulty, you can very well go wide and actually end up with waaay more science than with a tall empire, thanks to the lower threat posed by AIs, and by your higher happiness. Try Poland or Mayas for this.

 

[Gamewizard]

What is "far ahead in tech" to you?

 

[LoneRebel]

I don't know. But I've never seen an AI perform that way. Usually I'm only a few techs behind, but Bismarck is way ahead. Not only that but he has a larger empire.

I think my problem was that I went a little wide.

I think that the AI can go wide and stay ahead in tech because the insane bonuses. But when the player does it, it's almost impossible.

I played another game as Ethiopia with 4 cities and was way ahead in tech.

So that's probably where I went wrong.

You know what I've noticed? It's like you don't read most of the replies to your threads at all. It's like you just read one, reply to that one, and ignore the rest. And then you go on acting like your question hasn't been answered, even though the answer is usually somewhere in the thread.

 

[Babri]

You know what I've noticed? It's like you don't read most of the replies to your threads at all. It's like you just read one, reply to that one, and ignore the rest. And then you go on acting like your question hasn't been answered, even though the answer is usually somewhere in the thread.

This. He never posts any screenshots/saves about the game, just posts complains all the time.

 

[Calouste]

yup. This is how I steamroll the AI too. The small/tall AI start ahead, I catch up renaissance. And about the advent of the industrial my huge empire and growth starts outstripping everyone. More cities = massively better science if you play the game right. Just found them all before too late and they'll easily overcome science penalties. Especially on huge. My last game as tall/wide India I topped 7500 science/turn which is an information tech every 2-3 turns. Wide is the most powerful strategy for shear science output. I think I read that a small Babylon/Korea game can end quicker but only because the game ends before a truly wide empire reaches its full potential. If it was a bit longer no one would be arguing that small could be better...because it isn't. You will slow down in the end techs if you stay small, about around where your cities are struggling to grow further...whereas a wide game you'll get nothing but better as so many cities are growing at the same time.

"Too late" to found a city is pretty relative in BNW, specially if you go Order, with a helping of Commerce or Exploration. Run a food trade route, buy a few basic buildings, and you have a city that grows 1 pop every 1-2 turns.

 

[danaphanous]

"Too late" to found a city is pretty relative in BNW, specially if you go Order, with a helping of Commerce or Exploration. Run a food trade route, buy a few basic buildings, and you have a city that grows 1 pop every 1-2 turns.

That's totally true, but as there are a lot of factors I just stated it generally. Good points!

I've found similar results with Order, but haven't experimented much with those other trees. I was getting closer to 2-5 turns after 5-pop feeding with a cargo ship and purchasing aqueducts, and other basic useful food building like lighthouse/granary then emphasizing growth. It still took me about 50 turns with quick key purchases and worker actions to get them to top 100 science, but I was developing 5 at the same time...you can probably do a lot better just focusing on 1-2 late ones.

It can really vary based on how you encourage them. However, even on huge a 3% tech penalty in the information will be conservatively 0.03*10,000 beakers = 300 beakers which is a lot for a city to overcome in the 4-5 turns you are acquiring techs. As a result unless I'm just playing for fun, I find the science penalty best overcome with cities built before the advent of the modern era just because the game accelerates so much after this point. I haven't done a lot of hard math though, just kinda by feel. What is your opinion on what the break-even point is?

 

[Calouste]

That's totally true, but as there are a lot of factors I just stated it generally. Good points!

I've found similar results with Order, but haven't experimented much with those other trees. I was getting closer to 2-5 turns after 5-pop feeding with a cargo ship and purchasing aqueducts, and other basic useful food building like lighthouse/granary then emphasizing growth. It still took me about 50 turns with quick key purchases and worker actions to get them to top 100 science, but I was developing 5 at the same time...you can probably do a lot better just focusing on 1-2 late ones.

It can really vary based on how you encourage them. However, even on huge a 3% tech penalty in the information will be conservatively 0.03*10,000 beakers = 300 beakers which is a lot for a city to overcome in the 4-5 turns you are acquiring techs. As a result unless I'm just playing for fun, I find the science penalty best overcome with cities built before the advent of the modern era just because the game accelerates so much after this point. I haven't done a lot of hard math though, just kinda by feel. What is your opinion on what the break-even point is?

Commerce gives you a discount on purchasing and Exploration gives you three hammers in coastal cities plus extra happiness, which both help to get your new cities up quicker. It's not just about science, you might want to settle a city to get access to (more) Coal/Oil/Uranium/Aluminum or to create a Landmark or two. In the end the 3% penalty is not that much, even if you settle a city 100 turns before the end of the game, it can at most delay your victory by 3 turns. But the best thing is to just pump it, and that's easily done in BNW.

 

[reddishrecue]

If you think the ai is cheating, then just quit because the ai doesn't cheat. If you don't want to quit, then lower the difficulty because the ai doesn't cheat. Ai does stupid moves more often than normal.