Has the AI been broken with all the patches?

[KevinLancaster]

It seems that the AI we have now is way too happy with backstabbing and declares war a lot more often than the one we had at release. I remember once playing early on when the AI actually won by Science. Now the AI never seems to go for a peaceful victory at all. Do you guys think that with all the massive changes Firaxis has applied to the game since release the AI is now trying to compete at something it wasn't designed for?

 

[Malachi256]

You can't broke what ain't fixed!


Or something like that.

 

[Jim Bro]

the AI was a backstabber is a backstabber and will remain a backstabber. that's unfortunate that we can't have better relationships with them.

 

[klokwerk]

You can't broke what ain't fixed!


Or something like that.

Ah ah, nice one. Thanks.

 

[Maktaka]

Of the 7 AIs in my last game, two went for domination (of course my closest neighbors), one went for tech, one was going for diplomacy, and I never did figure out what the other three were doing. The domination ones, unsurprisingly, went to war early and backstabbed me from cold war to outright war a couple times before I smacked them down and broke their toys once and for all.

One of the unknowns also did a backstab, but he never got upset when I conquered capitals (the "They think you're trying to win the game the same way as them" message never appeared like it did with the two going domination) so I still don't know what his long term-strategy was. I doubt it had anything to do with getting whooped by the expanding tech AI though.

 

[Horizons]

The AI is better than it was at Civ5 release ... primarily because of the huge happiness bonuses it gets, but also because it builds more troops, attempts rushes in the early game, etc.

 

[apocalypse105]

You can't broke what ain't fixed!


Or something like that.

The main problem with the AI in civ 5 is that its just the wrong AI typ...

They put a good AI typ that is used in real time strategy games where diplomacy is non existent in a game where it is crucial...

So if they keep the Good AI typ in civilization there will never be diplomacy even if you add a lot of positif modifier AI can't handle them


As long as firaxis dont realise this civ 5 has no diplomacy and is just a wargame because they use this typ of AI...


I allways laugh at the patch notes like right they didnt fix the major problem that caused it all "the typ AI"

 

[nokmirt]

The main problem with the AI in civ 5 is that its just the wrong AI typ...

They put a good AI typ that is used in real time strategy games where diplomacy is non existent in a game where it is crucial...

So if they keep the Good AI typ in civilization there will never be diplomacy even if you add a lot of positif modifier AI can't handle them


As long as firaxis dont realise this civ 5 has no diplomacy and is just a wargame because they use this typ of AI...


I allways laugh at the patch notes like right they didnt fix the major problem that caused it all "the typ AI"

How do you know that what you are saying is true? And if it is, how in the heck can Firaxis be notified, so they can fix it? From what I read here http://aigamedev.com/open/articles/good-vs-fun/ we need a mix or balance of both. According to Soren Civ 4 is in the middle between Good and Fun AI, why can't CiV be as well?

Some other things I heard about the current AI in other threads, over the months.

1. It is basically AI from Civ IV, much of the new game was not redesigned, it is a continuation of those ideas from the previous game. So programming CiV was not particularly innovative.

2. Firaxis had a lot of updated ideas, but they use old programming to meet those ends, that were already in place from Civ IV. Programming and design deadlines also killed the game, because much of what was to be added, never was, due to time constraints.

3. The current AI does not understand 1UPT (among other things). And as far as diplomacy, Civ IV was based on diplomatic and other modifiers, CiV is not. Besides that, there really is not all that much there for the AI to diplomatize, because what was supposed to be added to CiV, was left out of the game.

4. In short we have an incomplete game here. Perhaps, they should have waited awhile before rushing it out there, until it could truly be the next step in civ gaming. However, since they did not wait, at least they could finish what they started, and get the game where is it supposed to be, with a better AI, better diplomacy, better naval combat, and I could run on and on and on and on with this sentence.

 

[apocalypse105]

How do you know that what you are saying is true? And if it is, how in the heck can Firaxis be notified, so they can fix it? From what I read here http://aigamedev.com/open/articles/good-vs-fun/ we need a mix or balance of both. According to Soren Civ 4 is in the middle between Good and Fun AI, why can't CiV be as well?

Some other things I heard about the current AI in other threads, over the months.

1. It is basically AI from Civ IV, much of the new game was not redesigned, it is a continuation of those ideas from the previous game. So programming CiV was not particularly innovative.

2. Firaxis had a lot of updated ideas, but they use old programming to meet those ends, that were already in place from Civ IV. Programming and design deadlines also killed the game, because much of what was to be added, never was, due to time constraints.

3. The current AI does not understand 1UPT (among other things). And as far as diplomacy, Civ IV was based on diplomatic and other modifiers, CiV is not. Besides that, there really is not all that much there for the AI to diplomatize, because what was supposed to be added to CiV, was left out of the game.

4. In short we have an incomplete game here. Perhaps, they should have waited awhile before rushing it out there, until it could truly be the next step in civ gaming. However, since they did not wait, at least they could finish what they started, and get the game where is it supposed to be, with a better AI, better diplomacy, better naval combat, and I could run on and on and on and on with this sentence.

Of course you need a balance of good AI and fun AI but it seems they didnt do that with civ 5 thats what i mean...

 

[RRtexasranger]

I think Fraxis needs to bring in 30 turn Non-Agression Pacts to the game. To many times I work up great friendly relations with someone, only for them to declare on me, sometimes just a little after I decide to help them out in the war they are fighting after they ask me.

 

[nokmirt]

Of course you need a balance of good AI and fun AI but it seems they didnt do that with civ 5 thats what i mean...

No they did not. I know what you mean.

 

[TPQ]

Did the devs break the AI with their patches? No. I'm not sure the AI was ever perfected enough to get broken. At least now it doesn't seem so schizophrenic, because it actually tells you it's backstabbing you, which is less frustrating then when it just declared war for no apparent reason.

Stupid AI, trying to simulate humans trying to win. If I wanted to play humans, I'd play multiplayer.

 

[SpearMan153]

I think they broke something the ai seems to declare war against multiple targets at the same time - its like it can't make up its mind who it wants to fight

it has nothing to do with good vs fun ai more like unfinished ai

 

[Thormodr]

The main problem with the AI in civ 5 is that its just the wrong AI typ...

They put a good AI typ that is used in real time strategy games where diplomacy is non existent in a game where it is crucial...

So if they keep the Good AI typ in civilization there will never be diplomacy even if you add a lot of positif modifier AI can't handle them


As long as firaxis dont realise this civ 5 has no diplomacy and is just a wargame because they use this typ of AI...


I allways laugh at the patch notes like right they didnt fix the major problem that caused it all "the typ AI"

Spot on. They tried to pound a square peg into a round hole.

Panzer General didn't have diplomacy either. Probably one of the reasons why the AI was semi competent. Well, that and set piece encounters.

Anyway, sounds like the Good AI versus Fun AI talk that Soren Johnson had.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJcuQQ1eWWI

 

[qemist]

Of course you need a balance of good AI and fun AI

I disagree. That whole Soren Johnson talk seemed like an apologia for weak, cheating AI which he cleverly rebrands as "fun AI" (unlike that nasty chess AI that always beats us). In reality the Civ* AI is nowhere close to competitive on level terms with average humans who have played a dozen games. In chess they call that a "beginner".

 

[Becomedeath]

I wonder how my actions are perceived by the AI...

...diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggie" until you can find a rock.

My only complaint about the general AI is that it doesn't seem to be particularly enthusiastic about winning. It's on the agenda, but there's no rush. So it ponders about and has occasional bouts of activity rather than setting it's mind to a task and persuing it relentlessly.

For example, Monty complained that I was trying to win the way he was yesterday, by domination. I had an empire spanning oceans, he had two cities...in 1700...

A little more dedication please.

 

[KevinLancaster]

I wonder how my actions are perceived by the AI...

...diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggie" until you can find a rock.

My only complaint about the general AI is that it doesn't seem to be particularly enthusiastic about winning. It's on the agenda, but there's no rush. So it ponders about and has occasional bouts of activity rather than setting it's mind to a task and persuing it relentlessly.

For example, Monty complained that I was trying to win the way he was yesterday, by domination. I had an empire spanning oceans, he had two cities...in 1700...

A little more dedication please.

Yeah, I think that's one of the major things I've felt after the newer patches. I think it's because they tried turning down the AI's "Grand Strategy" focus so they could expand early in the game, but they might have turned it down just a bit too much, so now the AI doesn't seem to actively pursue victory at all.

 

[nokmirt]

Ok, there has to be a way to help the AI make better amphibious landings, with naval escort. Once the DLL comes out, I am sure this will be looked into.

I think that Soren Johnson should have been hired for developing CiV AI, because he has experience from the two previous titles. He would have came up with some new and interesting ways to deal with the shortcomings of the current AI, of course while still making it fun. Does anyone know who is the current AI developer for CiV?

 

[spider1]

The main problem with the AI in civ 5 is that its just the wrong AI typ...

They put a good AI typ that is used in real time strategy games where diplomacy is non existent in a game where it is crucial...

So if they keep the Good AI typ in civilization there will never be diplomacy even if you add a lot of positif modifier AI can't handle them


As long as firaxis dont realise this civ 5 has no diplomacy and is just a wargame because they use this typ of AI...


I allways laugh at the patch notes like right they didnt fix the major problem that caused it all "the typ AI"

I couldn't have said it better myself. As much as I love playing this game, and I do, the diplomacy is a frigging train wreck.

 

[spfun]

Pangaea maps are almost a constant state of war for me nowadays where island maps are the complete opposite.