AI really needs **some** tweaking

[morchuflex]

Hello.

I'm sure there has already been tons of such comments. And we all know how stupid the computer is. But what I've just seen is so outrageous that I must convey it.
The year is 990 AD and my dromons have eventually found the Carthaginians after a looooong search. Why so long? Because they have the most miniscule empire I've ever seen.
They were born on a very small island. A human player would have built about 6 cities (all by the shore). But being a CP, they only built 2... And stayed like that eternally. They didn't even occupy all of their territory: part of it is surrounded by swamps, and they probably didn't feel like building extra workers. Close to them are some easy to reach islands they could have colonized... But they didn't. Probably because there are swamps there, too, and they fear mosquitoes.
Out of curiosity, I established an embassy and looked into Carthage to see what they were doing.
The city contained 16 military units, none of which was a ship, and they were still producing mercenaries.
Now, I know nothing about programming, but IMHO it shouldn't be that difficult to give the CPs at least ***some*** adaptability, should it? Like assessing available space and researching MM ASAP if it is found insufficient. Or build more usefull things than troops when the closest other civ is 20,000 leagues away...
I admit there has been improvment over Civ2 (where the game would often end before the CPs had colonized 2/3rds of their available space). But improving the AI still remains the most important thing to do. I really don't care about a 3D engine for Civ4. What I want is opponents that can challenge me on a regular basis (without cheats or production advantages).

I'm sure many of you could make such reports, couldn't they?

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

Well, you have a point about c3c city placement, which is a bit worse than in ptw (mostly they now often settle 1 tile away from any coast). But what you describe in detail is something the Civ3 game engine cannot handle, and nobody expected that:
The AI won't improve any tiles outside its cultural borders. Changing that would require more than a 'patch'...

We've found that problem for DyP a long time ago, when we had Jungle as non-settable; even when the Settler can do the job himself in no time, the AI cannot understand that concept.
For the AI, a Swamp outside its borders is like a Mountain - unsettable forever.

And isolated AIs will always fail; plus they get paranoid and build nothing but units.

Not that I wouldn't like a diferent way, but you're complaining not about bugs, but the way the AI is working since 2001.
And btw, if the AI design wouldn't be that brilliant (no joking!), why don't you win on Deity all the time, like in C2?

IMHO Civ3 has the best AI concept I've ever seen. It surely has flaws in the details, but surprisingly, all those stupidities still result in the most challenging AI you'll find. Remember, there are no cheats, scripted events, random wonders, etc. The AI plays its own ruleset, but that one is pretty close to yours.

 

[kokoras]

However it is realy strange the fact that AI did not expand,usually this is the first thing that does.AI is always trying to build cities as faster as it can and on the most unusuall places,i remember that someone has said that when you see AI building a city on a ''bad'' place it is because it knows that in the future a resource will apear,and i thing he was right.

 

[Pounder]

Someone pointed out to me once on this site that the AI is programmed not to win , but to stop you from winning.

Sometimes it appears to be artificial stupidity, but I have to agree with Doc that this is the best that it has been and I can't stop playing.

 

[LordKestrel]

The only time I ever get frustrated with the AI is when I watch the AI go to war. It's almost painful to watch. I cringe every time I see two civs fighting in/near my territory, and it's so bad I had to turn the aggression way down so I don't have to watch the AI try and fight.

 

[morchuflex]

And btw, if the AI design wouldn't be that brilliant (no joking!), why don't you win on Deity all the time, like in C2?
IMHO Civ3 has the best AI concept I've ever seen.

I certainly and gladly agree there has been a lot of progress from previous versions: no more random wonders, phantom caravans and diplomats popping out of thin air as in CiV1, much better expansion than in Civ2 etc.
However, if I cannot beat CIV3 on deity every time as I did Civ2, there are two reasons independant from the AI.
1. I'm still learning. I started Civ3 late january and bought Conquests two weeks ago.
2. (most importantly) The human player has been deprived of many useful features: you can no longer build wonders from a collective effort, catch up in tech with shiploads of diplomats, block enemy expansion with a few units (ZOCs) or grow cities at lightspeed with good old "We Love...".
I guess you'll say these features were removed because the AI couldn't handle them properly, and sometimes led to exploits. But a nasty consequence is that, in many aspects, it's not as if the AI was closer to playing like a human: much rather, the new rules force the human player to play more like a CP.
This may sound a bit harsh, but I felt that way from day one. From my first game, I started thinking: "great! They have removed whatever could make it easy for the human player". I agree it makes the game fairer to the AI, and I'm glad (somehow) to have my butt kicked ocasionnally, but that's not exactly the improvment I hoped for when Civ3 was in development.

 

[Pfeffersack]

I certainly and gladly agree there has been a lot of progress from previous versions: no more random wonders, phantom caravans and diplomats popping out of thin air as in CiV1, much better expansion than in Civ2 etc.
However, if I cannot beat CIV3 on deity every time as I did Civ2, there are two reasons independant from the AI.
1. I'm still learning. I started Civ3 late january and bought Conquests two weeks ago.
2. (most importantly) The human player has been deprived of many useful features: you can no longer build wonders from a collective effort, catch up in tech with shiploads of diplomats, block enemy expansion with a few units (ZOCs) or grow cities at lightspeed with good old "We Love...".
I guess you'll say these features were removed because the AI couldn't handle them properly, and sometimes led to exploits. But a nasty consequence is that, in many aspects, it's not as if the AI was closer to playing like a human: much rather, the new rules force the human player to play more like a CP.
This may sound a bit harsh, but I felt that way from day one. From my first game, I started thinking: "great! They have removed whatever could make it easy for the human player". I agree it makes the game fairer to the AI, and I'm glad (somehow) to have my butt kicked ocasionnally, but that's not exactly the improvment I hoped for when Civ3 was in development.

There is a lot of truth in it.CivIII AI has a lot of flaws, but it is still one of the best.However, this is reached by serious limitations to the human player, too.
Have you ever played SMAC? For me it still the the best "CIV"-game...tons of good ideas and details in it and most of it editable, too.The main problem was that those intresting strategic elements in the game were beyond the AIs abilities.At the end it was no problem for me to constantly win on the highest level... Nevertheless it was fun to play because the gameplay was not so streamlined.I wish they would combine the best elements of SMAC and CIVIII and improve the AI of CivIII in some critical points for CIV4 .No need for 3D...

 

[morchuflex]

Pfeffersack, I agree with you, SMAC had many qualities and I was addicted to it for quite some months.

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

Pounder:

Someone pointed out to me once on this site that the AI is programmed not to win , but to stop you from winning.

Are you referring to Warpstorm? In fact, he said something more like:
"The AI is programmed to grow big, not to win or prevent you from winning."

And that exactly desribes why I love that game - they AI does not always target the human, and acts like a civilization, not like it plays a game.

And yes, watching the AI fighting is painful

 

[Pounder]

Pounder:

Are you referring to Warpstorm? In fact, he said something more like:
"The AI is programmed to grow big, not to win or prevent you from winning."

I don't remember who it was, they may have been paraphrasing Warpstorm, broken telephone syndrome.

 

[morchuflex]

Pounder:

And that exactly desribes why I love that game - they AI does not always target the human, and acts like a civilization, not like it plays a game.

Definitely true. And that's an improvment. In Civ2, sometimes, when you were already far ahead, the AI wouldn't trade tech with you even when you were on good terms with them and you were willing to pay the price. But they still kept trading techs within each other. That was irritating.
Moreover, in Civ3 I frequently see CPs fighting each other to the bitter end. In previous versions, they would seldom go that far. And each time a city was captured or destroyed, peace talks would ensue...

In my last game, the French were attacking me, so I talked (or rather bought) their Babylonian neighbours to declare war on them. At first it didn't seem very wise: Babylon seemed weak, the French were already the dominating power, and they were likely to grow even stronger quickly by eating up the Babylonians... But to my surprise the mighty French empire crumbled in less than ten turns. Their best troops were probably en route to my territory when the Babylonians backstabbed them. That was the first time I really got something for my money when bribing another civ to share my wars.

Anyway, I agree Civ3 beats all previous versions and other civ-likes in most aspects. I'm just disappointed to see the AI hasn't progressed nearly as much as the graphics engine. That's definitely what the team should work on for Civ4. Unfortunately, most copies aren't sold to hard core gamers, and I guess you can't blame Sid to try and sell more to a less demanding audience. Still, "3D" sounds very unpleasantly (to my ears) as a pure marketing strategy. Geez! I would gladly pay one year of my salary (about 45,000 $) to anyone who could program a computer to play Civ smartly. Maybe we should gather money and launch a contest...

 

[Scrubber]

Do you guys think I should mod my games to let cities be built on swamp? It seems to me that this would help the AI in certain terrain conditions.

If I want to settle in a swamp, I will just chop it down. But the AI never does.

 

[morchuflex]

Do you guys think I should mod my games to let cities be built on swamp? It seems to me that this would help the AI in certain terrain conditions.

If I want to settle in a swamp, I will just chop it down. But the AI never does.

That would be a good idea, IMO.

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

We went the same way in DyP. You can build cities on Marsh and Jungle, however you need a more expensive Settler type unit for that, because the cheap one (in terms of shields, the other one is cheaper in pop instead) is wheeled. Since the AI tends to build both types, it turned out to work as intended.

 

[morchuflex]

What is DyP?

 

[The Last Conformist]

The "Double your Pleasure" mod. Check it out in C&C.

 

[Samson]

Geez! I would gladly pay one year of my salary (about 45,000 $) to anyone who could program a computer to play Civ smartly. Maybe we should gather money and launch a contest

This is one aspect of the game that makes me want to have a look at free civ, so I can have a go at it myself. At least try and make the AI attack with decent SoD rather than the dribles they use now. However, I am almost certain that I would find out the reason that it has not been sorted in however many years of civ devlopment (must be over 15 now musn't it) is that it is actually quite hard

 

[Dogmeat]

The AI won't improve any tiles outside its cultural borders. Changing that would require more than a 'patch'...

Some time ago, when I was playing PTW, I set one of my workers to automate. He noticed the lack of freshwater near my towns so he started to travel to a freshwater lake many tiles away from my nearest city and started irrigating to get irrigations within my borders...
Are you sure the AI doesn't do this with their workers? If so, your statement is incorrect.

 

[warpstorm]

Geez! I would gladly pay one year of my salary (about 45,000 $) to anyone who could program a computer to play Civ smartly. Maybe we should gather money and launch a contest...

It'd cost more than that to implement to the level you want.

 

[Ben E Gas]

I agree with not worrying about a 3D engine for Civ4 and work on creating a better AI and a game that won't need so many patches on its release.

Please impliment a trainer program like powerbar into civ4 as well and bring back the wonders videos. I miss those 2 things.