AI Battle testing

[Zeusmoltar9]

So here is my video time-lapse of an AI battle I set up: AI Battle

The settings are domination and score victory only and the AI is set to prince with turns set to custom 2000. I know the start locations are unfair but it doesn't seem to matter on the few tests I've done.

The basics as you watch the video highlight some major issues with the AI.

1) The AI has a hard time controlling its city amenities which causes riots and therefore barbarian spawns around the AI cities. This leads to the second problem. 2) Barbarians spawn units that are correct for the age that the AI are in, however the AI never upgrades there units for that age so much so that they are using units from 2 or 3 ages earlier. This ultimately means the barbarians are too strong and distracts the AI from fighting each other early to mid game 3) City defense are too strong. In fact later in the game it's near impossible for the AI to even take down city states with only 1 defending unit because defenses are so strong.

I tested a few other games with the same result. Even when 1 civ is prince and the other is deity. One of two things happen. They each stalemate out and never take each other cities or they take some cities and then give back anything taken during the peace making process.

I'm not super good with firetuner or AI in general if someone with more experience can chime in that would be great. I'm not sure anyone has done this yet but i'd love to hear if you have. I find it interesting that this mirrors what the devs have said that they have never had AI win domination victory in their tests.

Has anyone any more luck with AI battles? Is this kinda thing dead until AI is improved?

 

[dwarfling]

1) The AI just can't handle city building. It'll build districts as they come, then their cities don't grow because they're reluctant to build Builders to improve non-resource tiles and they can't build the other districts. This didn't happen in CiV because they could just build every building and their production bonuses helped with that.
2) Something must be preventing them from upgrading. I see it every game. Either the resource requirements hits them too hard and they refuse to build alt units and disband the outdated or they aren't producing enough gold because they skimp on building commercial hubs in every city (instead they build holy site and campus). Introduction of Niter was an awful decision.
3) I agree. Late game I had to do multiple (say 3-4) bombing runs with like 9 jet bombers to get thru the +100def of a pop8 city.

 

[fatgordy]

3) I agree. Late game I had to do multiple (say 3-4) bombing runs with like 9 jet bombers to get thru the +100def of a pop8 city.

Insanity.

 

[dexters]

@Zeusmoltar9 - what mod are you using to run AI battle?

3) I agree. Late game I had to do multiple (say 3-4) bombing runs with like 9 jet bombers to get thru the +100def of a pop8 city.

Uh... that's a good change. It was way too easy to take cities in Civ5 with just bombers (further, most of the early bomber promotions IIRC are related to bombing vs. land units. There are no city based promotions). The risk reward makes sense now. Bombers are very low risk so they return relatively little. Artillery can still wreck cities, but the double HP bars again slows things down compared to Civ5. It's actually one of the better things they changed in Civ6.

People are just not used to the slower pace.

 

[kaspergm]

3) City defense are too strong. In fact later in the game it's near impossible for the AI to even take down city states with only 1 defending unit because defenses are so strong.

Important note: This is only true in (mid +) late game. In early game, cities are paper castles and can easily be run over with a handful of warriors. You'll regularly see AI capture city states in ancient era using just a few units. Even in classical and medieval era, cities are easily taken with a couple of swordsmen and crossbowmen.

But this video was really disheartening in many ways. For one, the AI seems incapable of capturing barbarian civilians, even if they march right in front of their units. This would explain the frequent mass graveyuards of captured civilian units one comes across in the game. Also, the fact that Assyria builds such a massive army of Knight but is unable to get anything done with it shows something is not working properly.

 

[redwings1340]

This is really bad, If you add Ghandi in there with a nuke happy agenda, what happens? Would he be the only civ willing to open up the stalemate, or is the AI just not coded to know what nukes are?

 

[bbbt]

1) The AI has a hard time controlling its city amenities which causes riots and therefore barbarian spawns around the AI cities. This leads to the second problem.

That just seems bizarre to me. For the first half of the game, luxury resources alone seems more than enough to satisfy my cities (and I'm building far more than the AI). I rarely even make entertainment districts.

 

[bbbt]

But this video was really disheartening in many ways. For one, the AI seems incapable of capturing barbarian civilians, even if they march right in front of their units. This would explain the frequent mass graveyuards of captured civilian units one comes across in the game. Also, the fact that Assyria builds such a massive army of Knight but is unable to get anything done with it shows something is not working properly.

I almost think they should just switch the AI to use the barbarian AI for combat, as that seems to work better!

 

[redwings1340]

That just seems bizarre to me. For the first half of the game, luxury resources alone seems more than enough to satisfy my cities (and I'm building far more than the AI). I rarely even make entertainment districts.

I think what happens is that in wars, we as players generally use small advanced militaries, and the AI by design needs to use swarming, less advanced militaries to make up for the fact that they have no idea how to use units.

Therefore, the AI gets huge war weariness penalties when their units die, and we get small ones when our units live for the most part. It seems like yet another change the game made that the AI can't really adapt to, or that is bad for them.

 

[Zeusmoltar9]

@Zeusmoltar9 - what mod are you using to run AI battle?



Uh... that's a good change. It was way too easy to take cities in Civ5 with just bombers (further, most of the early bomber promotions IIRC are related to bombing vs. land units. There are no city based promotions). The risk reward makes sense now. Bombers are very low risk so they return relatively little. Artillery can still wreck cities, but the double HP bars again slows things down compared to Civ5. It's actually one of the better things they changed in Civ6.

People are just not used to the slower pace.

Firetuner mostly, and some custom scripting to get rid of higher difficulty AI bonuses (of which their are a lot of). The deity AI doesn't seem to be much different than prince AI, they simple build more units and it seems to cross the threshold of "can I roll over this opponent" more.

 

[Zeusmoltar9]

This is really bad, If you add Ghandi in there with a nuke happy agenda, what happens? Would he be the only civ willing to open up the stalemate, or is the AI just not coded to know what nukes are?

I haven't tried Ghandi. I can only assume he still won't attack. These two Ai hated each other a lot, Sumeria was -189 to Aztec and visa versa -178. During some other tests I sent them to -1000 relation and then gave them 100000 gold and they still wouldn't kill each other. I'm hoping it is the way firetuner is working with Civ 6, once purpose built software is released we will know for sure.

 

[bbbt]

I think what happens is that in wars, we as players generally use small advanced militaries, and the AI by design needs to use swarming, less advanced militaries to make up for the fact that they have no idea how to use units.

Therefore, the AI gets huge war weariness penalties when their units die, and we get small ones when our units live for the most part. It seems like yet another change the game made that the AI can't really adapt to, or that is bad for them.

I didn't realise that war weariness occurred from unit deaths - I thought it was simply a turns elapsed thing. While that seems 'realistic' in one sense, from a gameplay sense it seems like it would just contribute to accelerating a loss.

 

[Mustakrakish]

I didn't realise that war weariness occurred from unit deaths - I thought it was simply a turns elapsed thing. While that seems 'realistic' in one sense, from a gameplay sense it seems like it would just contribute to accelerating a loss.

I don't think it works that way actually. I believe it is indeed elapsed time plus maybe some other things. I haven't lost a single unit in war with Rome and yet I had rebellions / barbs spawning. Rome didn't want peace even when I sweetened the deal a bit... all the way until they wanted peace and give me all their money. Simply idiotic.

BTW it's ridiculous that my empire could't produce a single musket & bombard due to resource scarcity and yet somehow rebels got a hold of 2 muskets and a bombard...

 

[Alsark]

Ghandi

Ghandi

Gandhi*

 

[Ryika]

Gandhi*

Nuked from Orbit.

 

[Mustakrakish]

Nuked from Orbit.

Suddenly Gandhi