Predator145
King
- Joined
- May 22, 2020
- Messages
- 664
We know the AI avoids taking very unwinnable fights. It will generally avoid fighting full health armies in the open. But for some reason would do so when the army defends a city.
When facing fortified infantry with cavalry, the AI would often try to bypass the infantry in the city to go for empty ones beyond its reach to be slaughtered by the player's cavalry the next turn. The odds of a cavalry vs infantry fortified in the open is 13.6%, behind a wall/city it's 6.7%. The latter is almost, always avoided. This makes this period in the tech tree to be the most advantageous for the human to fight the AI. You can hurt them with artillery, but they can't hurt you (at least as well with Flintlock's patch).
The AI will be happy to use horsemen to attack spears or cav vs rifles behind walls/city. The odds of these are 20.1%. A tank vs a fortified infantry in a metro on a hill has similar odds at 22.9%
What's the cut off point percentage to trigger the AI to avoid combat? I suspect at single digit. But it could be higher. We know for sure that at 20% they're ok to go.
I'm looking to add a bunch of city defenses. Right now with each of them providing 25% boost I'd end up with with a max boost of 300% with metro on hill and radar tower. That's a 4x boost. It's not that excessive considering the AI esp with offensive artillery enabled will usually be left with 2-3 defenders.
The rule of thumb for offense vs a prepared defensive position is 3:1 on avg. But that's not vs heavily fortified targets like medieval castles/walled cities or a modern urban environment. 10:1 is considered necessary for a large fortified major modern city with the pop of a couple million or more :
"A French military source told AFP that the rule of thumb was that attacking forces needed to outnumber defenders 10-1 because the defenders had the advantage of knowing the territory. Defenders can also benefit from the height advantages from local buildings, with tanks and other armoured vehicles vulnerable to attacks from above.
"It would be suicide to send tanks into urban areas," said Alexander Grinberg from the Israeli think-tank JISS. They can't maneuver or move around... To conquer cities, you need professional infantry that is very motivated because it is always very difficult."
Even for Constantinople the Ottomans needed a 10:1 superiority with the latest siege weapons. And there was long and brutal fighting.
On higher difficulties the AI certainly has the SOD to overwhelm the player's and each other's buffed static defenses esp if there are no choke points. But I'm afraid it would cause them to just try to bypass them with their fast attackers just to be wiped out by counter attacks next turn. Bypassing static defenses and racing to the exposed rear is a good idea in real life, but not in Civ3 where the home field defenders are much more mobile on their roads.
Making the AI more aggressive and willing to accept casualties to overwhelm a tough target would IMO improve their performance, considering they have overwhelming numbers.
When facing fortified infantry with cavalry, the AI would often try to bypass the infantry in the city to go for empty ones beyond its reach to be slaughtered by the player's cavalry the next turn. The odds of a cavalry vs infantry fortified in the open is 13.6%, behind a wall/city it's 6.7%. The latter is almost, always avoided. This makes this period in the tech tree to be the most advantageous for the human to fight the AI. You can hurt them with artillery, but they can't hurt you (at least as well with Flintlock's patch).
The AI will be happy to use horsemen to attack spears or cav vs rifles behind walls/city. The odds of these are 20.1%. A tank vs a fortified infantry in a metro on a hill has similar odds at 22.9%
What's the cut off point percentage to trigger the AI to avoid combat? I suspect at single digit. But it could be higher. We know for sure that at 20% they're ok to go.
I'm looking to add a bunch of city defenses. Right now with each of them providing 25% boost I'd end up with with a max boost of 300% with metro on hill and radar tower. That's a 4x boost. It's not that excessive considering the AI esp with offensive artillery enabled will usually be left with 2-3 defenders.
The rule of thumb for offense vs a prepared defensive position is 3:1 on avg. But that's not vs heavily fortified targets like medieval castles/walled cities or a modern urban environment. 10:1 is considered necessary for a large fortified major modern city with the pop of a couple million or more :
"A French military source told AFP that the rule of thumb was that attacking forces needed to outnumber defenders 10-1 because the defenders had the advantage of knowing the territory. Defenders can also benefit from the height advantages from local buildings, with tanks and other armoured vehicles vulnerable to attacks from above.
"It would be suicide to send tanks into urban areas," said Alexander Grinberg from the Israeli think-tank JISS. They can't maneuver or move around... To conquer cities, you need professional infantry that is very motivated because it is always very difficult."
Even for Constantinople the Ottomans needed a 10:1 superiority with the latest siege weapons. And there was long and brutal fighting.
On higher difficulties the AI certainly has the SOD to overwhelm the player's and each other's buffed static defenses esp if there are no choke points. But I'm afraid it would cause them to just try to bypass them with their fast attackers just to be wiped out by counter attacks next turn. Bypassing static defenses and racing to the exposed rear is a good idea in real life, but not in Civ3 where the home field defenders are much more mobile on their roads.
Making the AI more aggressive and willing to accept casualties to overwhelm a tough target would IMO improve their performance, considering they have overwhelming numbers.
F of 3:2.
