AI more aggressive since Feb update? Keep dying!

Feanor_

Chieftain
Joined
Sep 16, 2019
Messages
11
Is it just me, or is the AI on Immortal much more aggressive since the Feb update?

I don't seem to be able to continue my successful game from before the update because, as often seems to happen when updates come out and I'm mid-game, it's gone unstable after loading from the save. So while Aspyr look at my bug report I've tried starting again.

And I keep dying.

The AI keep declaring war on me early on, forcing me to rush build Warriors and Slingers right from the start preventing me from building any infrastructure or Settlers. I thought I'd cracked my defence on my game just now but then the Aztec second wave came in with four Chariots while half my army was off trying to hunt down a Barb camp.

Have I just had a run of bad luck and/or forgotten how to play the early game, or is the AI now super-aggressive?
 
Well... I guess the game's now harder, to those who complained that it was too easy. :p Also, what difficulty are you playing?
 
Immortal :) I hid that in my first para ;) I was able to beat it fairly consistently on Immortal before but now it's a real struggle for survival
 
Hmm... I'm not entirely sure, but it might have something to do with the new Mode. Are you using it?
 
Good question. Yeah I'm using the new Barbarian Clans mode - I certainly find Barbs more of a challenge too, but would that affect the AI going to war so early before I've been able to put down any infrastructure at all? I'm able to get out one Scout, and maybe one or even just half a Settler before I have to switch to Warriors and Slingers. This is despite sending a Delegation to them straight away.

Maybe, though, part of the problem is having to focus an extra military unit or two on the Barbs because they're tougher, weakening the forces I can have around my cities.
 
I play immortal too, and so far have found AI less aggressive. Barbs are a nuisance as ever in early game. I guess it’s just a fluke and that you had some bad luck?
 
Is it just me, or is the AI on Immortal much more aggressive since the Feb update?
No, I don't think anything has changed very much in this respect, you just got a very special neighbour. Close Monty is a gamble: you could try and handle them diplomatically by not improving a single luxury yourself, unless it is a luxury that they have already connected. Before too long, his agenda will kick in, he'll turn smiley face and then you can lock him in a DoF for the rest of the game or as long as you need.
That can work if he has some other distractions to busy himself with. If the most interesting thing in his neighbourhood is you, well then, tough luck, nobody will help you except your archers.

To contrast your experience, I can tell you about my immortal post-patch game - a complete snooze, my roughriding Teddy needed not to be so rough. Only potshots my units took were at a few barbs and free cities units. No denouncements, no DOWs targeting me. Completely peaceful game.
Another Deity game with Bull Moose Teddy that I'm playing on Switch now, my close neighbour is Shaka. I settled near him, I culture bombed his territory, I had troops near his border, there are more red diplo modifiers than green with him, and throughout the entire game so far he only displays an unsmiley face. Almost all the time his military power is almost double than mine, but no denouncement, no surprise DOW, nothing, only fruitful trade between us, albeit a bit tense. We'll see how it goes on further :)
Both games with no modes enabled, btw.
 
Last edited:
Is it just me, or is the AI on Immortal much more aggressive since the Feb update?

Barbs I think are a pinch more aggressive, but what I've noticed the most is the AI is *smarter about when and where they get aggressive. I was surprised the first few times I played with the new barbarian mode that the barbs were using combined warfare and pretty good at identifying and isolating my weaker units when I sent a raiding party.
 
The AI has always had its early game aggression streaks in my experience. The only difference I've noticed was that I captured Kongo's capital and for some reason, they wouldn't negotiate a peace. I got into a stalemate because he had allied with Armagh and I couldn't take his penultimate city since they were too close together and my troops couldn'tget an advantage, while he couldn't retake the his capital, but wouldn't negotiate for peace either. In the end, the Malians took suzerainty of Armagh and declared war on Kongo, which gave me the break I needed to take the next city while Malians liberated Muscat, wiping out Kongo.

I've never had an AI unwilling to negotiate a peace treaty before.
 
Barbs I think are a pinch more aggressive, but what I've noticed the most is the AI is *smarter about when and where they get aggressive. I was surprised the first few times I played with the new barbarian mode that the barbs were using combined warfare and pretty good at identifying and isolating my weaker units when I sent a raiding party.
Ime. barbarians have always been brutally efficient, and far more dangerous than major civs, because they seem to be much more risk willing with their units - it used to be so that if the barbs could kill a unit, they would do so, no matter the cost. Therefore I was actually surprised, when my horseman in the screenshot below, who I was sure I could write off as dead, was not targeted by the barbs, who decided the better move was to throw all their coursers against my walled city, with absolutely no effect other than killing themselves.
Spoiler :
upload_2021-3-11_14-51-49.png
 
Interesting perspectives, thanks. My mistake though - it wasn't the Aztecs who wiped me out but another similar civ. Anyway, in case anyone's interested in playing the first 50 turns or so here's the save starting the game. I initially thought it was a strong starting position, so if you want to try it then do try to play as if you didn't know you'd be on the defensive early on!

For myself, I'm not sure whether to try a replay or just start again with a new map.
 

Attachments

  • KUBLAI KHAN (MONGOLIA) 1 4000 BC.Civ6Save
    839.7 KB · Views: 22
Is it just me, or is the AI on Immortal much more aggressive since the Feb update?

I don't seem to be able to continue my successful game from before the update because, as often seems to happen when updates come out and I'm mid-game, it's gone unstable after loading from the save. So while Aspyr look at my bug report I've tried starting again.

And I keep dying.

The AI keep declaring war on me early on, forcing me to rush build Warriors and Slingers right from the start preventing me from building any infrastructure or Settlers. I thought I'd cracked my defence on my game just now but then the Aztec second wave came in with four Chariots while half my army was off trying to hunt down a Barb camp.

Have I just had a run of bad luck and/or forgotten how to play the early game, or is the AI now super-aggressive?
I can absolutely totally confirm this. And if you barely survive one or two attacks then the barbs will send you tons and tons and tons of horsemen, skirmishers, crossbowmen and short after musketmen long before you are anywhere near being able to take out the camp.
 
Interesting perspectives, thanks. My mistake though - it wasn't the Aztecs who wiped me out but another similar civ. Anyway, in case anyone's interested in playing the first 50 turns or so here's the save starting the game. I initially thought it was a strong starting position, so if you want to try it then do try to play as if you didn't know you'd be on the defensive early on!

For myself, I'm not sure whether to try a replay or just start again with a new map.

Gave it a go - to be honest, it was a damb squid of a start and almost nothing of note happened. My initial warrior even died horribly and needlessly in a blizzard after one of many lapses of concentration - but I didn't miss him. Everyone went to friendly stances straight away. The droughts were brutal though. The most noteworthy event: buying a quadrireme from a camp for my brandnew ocean city. It ended up in the small lake to the west.
It's probably a tough position to get anything going, but it didn't feel threatening at all.
 

Attachments

  • KUBLAI KHAN (MONGOLIA) 104 300 BC.Civ6Save
    2.1 MB · Views: 21
Top Bottom