Opinions on the "AI"

[Archon_Wing]

If the AI was "functional" as in giving the player a tough challenge, then your build options would be limited in Emperor, too. Just as in multi-player, a strong AI would force you into optimal play to avoid losing. Would that impact the fun, as you view it?

The game currently lets you explore many different paths and still win. The stronger the AI gets, the fewer the number of those paths that will lead to victory.

Well, maybe in an absolute sense , but maybe the gulf wouldn't be so big.

K-mod in civ 4 was pretty ruthless but it still left room for diplomacy. It doesn't have to be world class ai. There's also civ 5's Vox Populi's ai.

And here's the other thing. 4 and 5 roleplayed. There were flavors. Outside of agendas and religion prefernce, all the ai leaders behave the same. So even if the ai should play badly, it shoukd do it in an interesting way.

In R&F, religion is now viable in deity. Yeah, it sets you back, but for those looking for a challenge, it's rather fun (as I view fun, as it puts you in a position where you need to make good decisions based on what the game is throwing at you in your current circumstances).

Can you really snag a religion every game? They go pretty fast not even on deity so sounds a little interesting.

 

[Aristos]

You missed out the word always. Try @unpossible251 advice but as England deity, standard everything, no advanced options. I can guarantee you will not win every game. It’s just bs bravado is you say you do,

Just for lols tonight I played Nubia for the first time, it is ridiculously easy with a great early civ... but when playing with a bad civ against all these good civs you can just be wrecked, no restarts, not turn replays.

I don't get your aggressiveness, I was just posting an opinion. Why would I lie? Granted, I don't play that much, I have only a few games post R&F, but all won. Maybe if I play much more, the rule of big numbers will show me otherwise. No need to pre-accuse anyone of bs bravado, mind you.

Then again, maybe I don't feel like playing much more because I have the expectation of winning in the end even if my early performance is not stellar, thanks to the combo Magnus-superspies, which so far in my limited experience is basically "solve-it-all", be it wrecking all Spaceports around the world or stealing the main CV contender dry of their Arts and artifacts...

Valid points. However. I play Emperor an no higher. The higher you go. The less fun it is. Your build options are limited. Many of us want to keep the fun in the game. So having an functional AI is important and this post is accurate.

I'm not sure about that. See my other posts about the use of "super spies" that can basically solve anything, in my experience at least. You can start a high-diff game in a less than stellar or optimal way, build with a good amount of flexibility, and then slowly but steadily catch up with the help of a Magnus in a centralized industrial powerhouse that can use multiple IZs at once in said city, combined with very specialized spies that can wreck the entire opposing Space programs, and/or steal everything from a CV candidate.

It has been my limited experience post R&F that I have won SVs with random civs at higher diffs, with only ONE Spaceport located in that Magnus industrial city, and with my spies stopping any opposition. If some do not believe that, well, too bad, but that is my experience so far.

Bottom line, AI needs work for sure. It's better now, and the game fun, but not challenging.

 

[kaspergm]

Best changes I have seen for the AI in terms of mods are:

• Cheaper districts and less district cost scaling
• Remove joint wars

These two changes seem to help the AI a lot.

1) The AI will actually build many more and more varied districts. This helps them with science, production and culture.

2) Unlike what one could fear, once you remove joint wars, the AI actually declares surprise and formal wars where they prepare for them and take action on them, instead of the stupid joint wars where they will just DoW and then do nothing. I have seen AI take not only walled city-states but also eliminate other AI players. Alliances and emergencies still seem to cause AI some trouble, but it's much better.

 

[Bro]

Higher difficulties don't make the ai any better. Plus it contorts the game and makes certain things impossible like religions.

Nah, religion is not impossible. It's easier to get it in R&F than in vanilla.

Get Magnus asap and abuse chopping with +50% unit production cards and direct the overflow towards Holy Site Prayers.

 

[Infixo]

• Remove joint wars

How exactly you do so?

 

[kaspergm]

How exactly you do so?

There's a mod on Steam. It's called "No Joint War". Works like a charm.

 

[Abaxial]

My experience of "No Joint War" was that the AI never went to war at all.

 

[Victoria]

I don't get your aggressiveness,

Because I get really tired of people who say it’s easy but only use OP cvs amd/or save restore. It is possible on deity now to be crushed. Some people even manually pick opponents amd then claim it’s easy.
You may have been lucky amd I do not deny the AI is crap but when you play at deity yourself often and are also an OK player then you do know the reality.
So yes, I do get pissed.

 

[Abaxial]

Actually it doesn't bother me at all. My enjoyment of Civ is really in the building of an empire. The AI civs are just speed bumps for the most part. I don't require the game to be challenging.

 

[Art Morte]

Actually it doesn't bother me at all. My enjoyment of Civ is really in the building of an empire. The AI civs are just speed bumps for the most part. I don't require the game to be challenging.

I half-agree. The AI does not necessarily have to be able to win games all that often. The core idea of pretty much all single player games is that you play them through, that you beat the game. Not that you get stuck halfway through because the AI is unbeatable.

But a) there should be a bigger sense of danger in Civ6. Especially after you survive the first couple of ages, combat - especially defensive - becomes too easy. Even when the AI has more and better troops, the combat AI is just too woeful. Too much smooth sailing in this regard.
And b) even if the AI does not have to win to be considered decent, it should be able to better counter the human player's winning efforts. Most of the time you know far too soon in Civ6 that you're going to eventually win, because the AI is bad at taking effective action against your goals.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

In R&F, religion is now viable in deity. Yeah, it sets you back, but for those looking for a challenge, it's rather fun (as I view fun, as it puts you in a position where you need to make good decisions based on what the game is throwing at you in your current circumstances).

Can you really snag a religion every game? They go pretty fast not even on deity so sounds a little interesting.

Every game? I guess that depends on how much you prioritize it. I missed out on a deity religion a couple of games ago because I moved my starting Settler two turns before settling, then built a Settler (and bought a second Settler) before running prayers, and Arabia was in the game so grabbed the prophet I thought I was getting. Would I have got a religion if I had simply run prayers earlier? Probably in that game. In every circumstance, hard to say but it's viable as in likely to work.

Nah, religion is not impossible. It's easier to get it in R&F than in vanilla.

Get Magnus asap and abuse chopping with +50% unit production cards and direct the overflow towards Holy Site Prayers.

If you're waiting for a governor, you may have missed the religions in some deity games. In any event, you don't need to use chops or overflows.

[Scout, Slinger/Warrior, Builder], Holy Site, Prayers seems to work. You can mix and match the order of the first three to your own preference and the aggressiveness of your neighbours. Getting a lucky boost for Mysticism by finding a wonder is really helpful, so gambling on sending out a Scout is likely a better bet than usual when aiming for an immortal/deity religion.

 

[Thibaulthc]

There's been a significant improvement of the AI since R&F IMHO.
I lost a couple of games early, because of a military rush that I wasn't prepared to (immortal)
But once I catch up, yes indeed it's often not challenging any more
I often play with Smoother Difficulty, on demi god mode : no extra settlers nor units at the beginning for the AI, but stronger bonuses over the time.
IE I'm now in a game pangea / demi god / historic speed (x2 techs /civics / gp / eras but normal production speed ) / large map with 13civs-17 cs /.. and after 320 turns in still 7 techs behind Korea and a few techs behind the leaders. It's been a while since I was not sure to win after so many turns.

 

[unpossible251]

Because I get really tired of people who say it’s easy but only use OP cvs amd/or save restore. It is possible on deity now to be crushed. Some people even manually pick opponents amd then claim it’s easy.
You may have been lucky amd I do not deny the AI is crap but when you play at deity yourself often and are also an OK player then you do know the reality.
So yes, I do get pissed.

Hey, did anybody play XCom? XCom 1 i mean, I never played 2. Anyway there was a mode, not a difficulty setting, but a mode, called HardCore, whereby every mission became permanent. No reload options, and losing a soldier was a permanent loss.

Firaxis - or an enterprising modder - should really bring this in.

 

[Victoria]

Hey, did anybody play XCom? XCom 1 i mean, I never played 2. Anyway there was a mode, not a difficulty setting, but a mode, called HardCore, whereby every mission became permanent. No reload options, and losing a soldier was a permanent loss.

Firaxis - or an enterprising modder - should really bring this in.

Not the only game to have this, even mine craft has... or had this option. Dead is dead mode.
I really wish they had it, I truly do, it would sort out the wheat from the chaff.
Deity england death mode, it really is no guarantee.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

There's been a significant improvement of the AI since R&F IMHO.
I lost a couple of games early, because of a military rush that I wasn't prepared to (immortal)
But once I catch up, yes indeed it's often not challenging any more
I often play with Smoother Difficulty, on demi god mode : no extra settlers nor units at the beginning for the AI, but stronger bonuses over the time.

I'm a bit baffled by why the development team hasn't at least tried this route.

Initial bonuses (extra settlers) make sense from a snowballing perspective, but after a certain point dramatically change the game experience (exploration, for example, or surviving the deity 5 Warrior rush). And no matter how big the initial bonuses are, once you catch the AI, it's like you're back to playing Prince.

Consistent bonuses (extra combat strength, production bonuses) are better and I'm glad to see these, but again once you've caught the AI, you know it can't come back to win.

Escalating bonuses seem like the best route. They also tie logically to the era system. If the AI gets tougher and tougher, it should shorten the "I've won, now I'm just hitting Next Turn to prove it" stage of the game. For some reason, though, Firaxis seems to avoid bonuses that escalate each era.

 

[MarigoldRan]

I'm a bit baffled by why the development team hasn't at least tried this route.

Initial bonuses (extra settlers) make sense from a snowballing perspective, but after a certain point dramatically change the game experience (exploration, for example, or surviving the deity 5 Warrior rush). And no matter how big the initial bonuses are, once you catch the AI, it's like you're back to playing Prince.

Consistent bonuses (extra combat strength, production bonuses) are better and I'm glad to see these, but again once you've caught the AI, you know it can't come back to win.

Escalating bonuses seem like the best route. They also tie logically to the era system. If the AI gets tougher and tougher, it should shorten the "I've won, now I'm just hitting Next Turn to prove it" stage of the game. For some reason, though, Firaxis seems to avoid bonuses that escalate each era.

Hence Mods. Specifically: "Adaptive Difficulty."

 

[Victoria]

Hence Mods. Specifically: "Adaptive Difficulty."

Yeah it was nice to inspire a mod with an idea. I think the mod is great and I even played it and was impressed.

 

[seankhan]

the ai cant win the game,ever.its only yours to loose.

 

[Aristos]

Because I get really tired of people who say it’s easy but only use OP cvs amd/or save restore. It is possible on deity now to be crushed. Some people even manually pick opponents amd then claim it’s easy.
You may have been lucky amd I do not deny the AI is crap but when you play at deity yourself often and are also an OK player then you do know the reality.
So yes, I do get pissed.

Fair enough, but maturity should tell you that it is not a good idea to put everyone in the same bag. In this case, you are wrong period (in fact, I also dislike people that "cook" their setup just to be able to say/post/"steam-achieve" something that in the end is trivial... but I am not one of them).

I play at Deity myself, do not cook setups, use what the game gives me as tools, and have been winning even without pressing for optimal play early. Does that show OP strategies? Maybe, I am even acknowledging that possibility when I talk about spies or Magnus. My point still is that perhaps those strategies are OP because the AI is so weak that it does not use them, nor can counter them. That is still a weak AI first, before OP strats.

In any case, the controversy does not give you the right to insult anyone, demerit his opinion, or generalize.

Not the only game to have this, even mine craft has... or had this option. Dead is dead mode.
I really wish they had it, I truly do, it would sort out the wheat from the chaff.
Deity england death mode, it really is no guarantee.

All Paradox games have an Ironman mode, where only the game saves to a file, effectively cutting off save scumming (yeah, there is a way to circumvent it, but it requires a little work that most people would not be willing to do). Only Ironman games can get Steam achievements. It's a nice way to "level" the field in terms of the often trivial achievements.

Still, a weak AI diminishes any possible achievement anyways.

 

[Krajzen]

Civilization VI is not a strategy game, nor simulation game or immersion game.

It is a dopamine loop system of addictively filling buckets and having a constant sense of futile accomplishment, where the player needs to be rewarded and cannot be punished.

It is afraid to provide drawbacks and negative modifiers, to the point of supposed "dark ages" having their own set of bonuses. The expansion is called Rise and Fall but you cannot fall. That would be unpleasant sensation.

Why invest in such things as capable AI? It's a difficult investment in a system which has no shiny buttons, sexy advertisements and worst of all: it is potentially detrimential to the casual pleasure.

Some part of the playerbase finds it alluring, to the point of insane praise give to how in civ "there are so many ways to win".

Yeah, because there is no way to lose. There is nothing at stake. There is no drama of challenge and joy of victory.

That's here we are: at a shallow, colorful pleasure generator; a board game where almost every move is a winning move and choices don't matter.

After all, games such as Darkest Dungeon, Dwarf Fortress, Dark Souls, Divinity: Original Sin or Kingdom Come: Deliverance have proven that challenge is detrimential to the satisfaction.

Also, programing good strategy game AI is impossible and Vox Populi is fake news hoax conspiracy of frustrated haters to put Firaxis in a bad light. Such mod never existed.