AI resources vision?

I agree with Macksideshow. The blue circle may not predict the "best" city location, but it will ALWAYS show what spots would provide the MOST RESOURCES.

I too have ignored the blue circle only to, 20+ turns later, be disappointed when a new resource is discovered and it's *just* outside of the BFC. And if I had settled in the circle, it would have been inside the BFC.

Since the AI uses these blue circles to settle their cities, it means they do have implied knowledge of the resources ahead of time. They might not know what SPECIFIC resources they will be getting, but they know that by settling *that* location, they will get SOME resources (and more than nearby spots would provide), even if there aren't any resources available at the time they actually settle.

So, in the OP's example, I think it is fair to say that the AI knew that it would be getting some resource(s) if it settled in the bad tundra/ice location. It didn't just settle there and hope something would pop up - it knew something eventually would. I think it may have gotten lucky that it was iron, but it will probably also have oil and/or uranium later on too.
 
I agree with Macksideshow. The blue circle may not predict the "best" city location, but it will ALWAYS show what spots would provide the MOST RESOURCES.

I too have ignored the blue circle only to, 20+ turns later, be disappointed when a new resource is discovered and it's *just* outside of the BFC. And if I had settled in the circle, it would have been inside the BFC.

Since the AI uses these blue circles to settle their cities, it means they do have implied knowledge of the resources ahead of time. They might not know what SPECIFIC resources they will be getting, but they know that by settling *that* location, they will get SOME resources (and more than nearby spots would provide), even if there aren't any resources available at the time they actually settle.

So, in the OP's example, I think it is fair to say that the AI knew that it would be getting some resource(s) if it settled in the bad tundra/ice location. It didn't just settle there and hope something would pop up - it knew something eventually would. I think it may have gotten lucky that it was iron, but it will probably also have oil and/or uranium later on too.

Some people believe in Santa Claus too, but that doesn't make him real. This whole discussion goes back so far and has been proven to be not true so many times that it's getting really boring to go through it all again.
 
I'll have to look it up. It seems quite hard to prove not true considering all anecdotal evidence suggests that it is true.

For example, here is a screenshot of a game I am playing. Please tell me how China decided to settle one spot south of oil way back in the 1300s? It's because a blue circle was there, which told them they would get something if they settled there:



Happens way too much to be a "coincidence".

and the same picture... Mali just HAPPENED to have settled where he not only has access to fur (well, if I wasn't in the way), but ALSO happens to have Uranium... :mischief:
 
At a guess China was competing for that iron mine. Not effectively, but that would make a blue circle appear just like the fur would make one appear for the Mali. The blue circles don't know that you are going to overmatch the culture. Since Mansa is a culture monger, in a lot of games he would have successfully gotten some of the fur.

Like a lot of anecdotal evidence this tends to support whatever position is already held.
 
How can you explain this?

No he doesn't have Physics.

P.S. I WB out his city and gave him another settler and he founded another city on the same spot.
 

Attachments

  • no-physics.jpg
    no-physics.jpg
    66.9 KB · Views: 103
How can you explain this?

No he doesn't have Physics.
Unfortunately I don't know exacty how the AI calculates where to settle, but what you've posted would show a very poor placement, even if the AI new where uranium was.
The thread I linked to proves that AIs don't see resources they lack the tech for, you can check it yourself with the save DanF uploaded.
P.S. I WB out his city and gave him another settler and he founded another city on the same spot.
The value of the site wouldn't realistically changed by deleting the city so a new settler was bound to do that, try doing the same thing after removing the uranium via WB :p
 
I think DanF's test is flawed since the the central tile is a hill, and the AI has a massive hardon for hills.

Taking out the uranium makes him settle 1 northeast.
 
I think DanF's test is flawed since the the central tile is a hill, and the AI has a massive hardon for hills.
Not sure what the hill is for, probably to ensure the first settler settles in pace in all cases. The point of the test however is what the second AI settler does, which is favouring the resource deficient SW point in the absence of the techs to see the iron, horse and copper in the other directions.
Taking out the uranium makes him settle 1 northeast.
That is interesting, could you upload the save?
 
Also check out Antioch.
 

Attachments

  • nw94 AD-1130.CivBeyondSwordSave
    623 KB · Views: 36
Settles on the 'uranium' tile after removing the uranium for me :confused:. The blue circles do get updated, they aren't static so perhaps something happened to change it if you did the tests successively, of note would be the incoming Japanese settler on a galley, if it had landed when you tested after deleting the uranium, it may have forced the settler to settle differenty.

Theres nothing suspicious at all about Antioch, it settled on silver that it could see from the start of the game and doesn't have any hidden resources :confused:. Indeed is supports the no cheating argumet as it missed the aluminium :p
 
Top Bottom