Glad your back!! Please focus on the AI producing obscene amounts of military units to present a challenge (except for dozens of supply convoys and MEngineers
)
Resource icon
- Thread starter Siesta Guru
- Start date
Glad your back!! Please focus on the AI producing obscene amounts of military units to present a challenge (except for dozens of supply convoys and MEngineers
)
Morgawr
Civ Fanatic
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,235
Yay welcome back!
My current impressions of the GS AI is that tactically it's in much better shape than it used to be a year or two ago. However, biggest weakness is that AI doesn't pursue victory conditions aggressively enough. It either does not commit to one or change its victory path too often or too late. When it does commit to something, it can be quite effective. I have seen the AI take cities effectively and play much smarter with its apostles in religious combat as well. In my current game, Japan went all in for RV quite early starting in Medieval era and converted all my cities and has my holy city surrounded. I am clinging to dear life to keep my last apostles alive to respark my religion and take revenge. My point is when it makes this strategic decision to go all-in it can play it well, but in majority of my (deity) games the AIs that found religions don't play aggressively and let me take out their religion and don't pose a challenge.
Same parallels in domination, scientific, cultural etc victories. The capability of the AI to be competitive seems to be buried somewhere in the code or decision trees, but the AIs don't choose that path most of the time and just tend to 'float'.
Siesta Guru
Prince
Thanks for your analysis, that's an area I can at least do something in, so I'll look out for that. Have you had any other observations?
Glad your back!! Please focus on the AI producing obscene amounts of military units to present a challenge (except for dozens of supply convoys and MEngineers
How does everyone else feel about this? I've heard some mixed messages when it comes to AI unit production before. Some like the extra challenge, some think it interrupts their peaceful games too much, some correctly observe that it can make peaceful victories harder (except when an AI succeeds and conquers another)
In the current state on Deity I have to use a mod called “Fortified AI” to even present a challenge. The AI has lost a chromosome or two since Civ 6 was released when it comes to war but I have yet to lose any of my cities soon as walls go up, even on Deity.
I think if the AI has enough units it would be capable of taking other civs cities based on what I’ve seen in testing GS.
AI’s with 10x the military score of a humans army (Deity) would at least be an interesting challenge. In its current state, even being outnumbered 4x or 5x isn’t unmanageable.
I am actually quite surprised how effectly the current AI can levy troops from other CS in the game (at least for defense). It’s the only time they are an actual challenge.
I think if the AI has enough units it would be capable of taking other civs cities based on what I’ve seen in testing GS.
AI’s with 10x the military score of a humans army (Deity) would at least be an interesting challenge. In its current state, even being outnumbered 4x or 5x isn’t unmanageable.
I am actually quite surprised how effectly the current AI can levy troops from other CS in the game (at least for defense). It’s the only time they are an actual challenge.
Glad to see you're still alive...
I'll be here around...Okay I’ve played a couple of games after I changed two things:
1) yields.xml: changed standing army, combat units, naval units, air units, increased all of those slightly and found Immortal & Deity AI builds a crap ton of units. As an example on turn 125 I had 350 military strength, all the other AI’s ranged from 1200-2400.
2) buildings & tech xml: changed the strength of walls to almost nothing. From 100 value to 1 for walls, castle, star fort & urban defended.
What I’ve noticed: I was able to one city from AI only because I involved two other AI’s in the war. If their siege units would attack my melee or ranged there is no chance I would have been able to.
I did lose a couple units and had to peace out after I got the city as they made peace with the other civs and were bringing their army toward me. If they had access to horses I probably wouldn’t have been able to pull it off.
The one thing I’m concerned about in GS is that the AI’s are way too friendly toward the human player. Not sure if it’s the new grievances system or what, but at turn 125 I had all but one as a declared friend. This is concerning as the AI just doesn’t seem to want to declare war.
I have autoplayed quite a few games now with these settings and AI will take cities if it wants to. It’s not like Hiawatha in Civ 5 just steamrolling everything in its path but in general if they go to war with the intent of taking a city, they do it.
I think AI+ going forward has to make the AI’s tougher to get along with so they will actually declare war on you past the ancient era, I’m not sure if that’s even adjustable. I looked in the diplomacy actions file and have thought about changing some values in there but I can’t find a file where they have grievances values.
Morgawr
Civ Fanatic
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,235
I fully agree with the diplomacy points and that it's too easy to get along. I have noticed some distinct behavior there that can hopefully be changed to make it more challenging:
- As soon as an AI turns green / friendly, 99% of the time they will accept your friendship request immediately on that turn or next. If you have researched alliances, again 99% of the time they accept that as well. There seems to be a very low attitude threshold currently. e.g. at cumulative attitude 5 it turns friendly/green but accept friendship should be a much higher value like 50. Same to alliance. More turns need to be pass for friendships to 'ripen', right now it happens too fast. Interestingly though, this happens mostly between AI-human player. I see many AI-AI that are friendly to one another but don't declare formal friendship or alliance. So it favors the human player which is the opposite of what we want.
- Once you are in an alliance, you are basically "locked in" for the rest of the game. You can beat wipe out their religion, cause grievances, get a bunch of negative diplo modifiers. Say you have so many grievances that you have a net -40. This becomes irrelevant because as soon as the alliance expires and they are still friendly, at that very turn, 90% of the time you can go and re-declare friendship and alliance. AIs need to have some cool down or grace period after such agreements expire so their attitude value can adjust. My understanding is that the -8, +4 etc modifiers we see on the UI are the per turn change, and behind the scenes there is some hidden cumulative attitude value x. So during an alliance this x is locked at a high value like e.g. 50. Right after the alliance expires, even if you are supposed to get a -40 per turn, it doesn't matter because you can renew that very turn, before the values re-adjust.
- This one is rule-change need outside scope but will point out nevertheless: it is silly that you can declare friendships and alliances with everyone and even if the whole world is at war, you can stay "neutral" and not have to choose sides. In most games involving diplomacy, your allies or friends attacking one another would force you to choose sides - e.g. you either join war on one side and piss off the other, or cancel your alliance status with both and cause grievances to both. You shouldn't be allowed to stay neutral while still having an alliance pact.
- As soon as an AI turns green / friendly, 99% of the time they will accept your friendship request immediately on that turn or next. If you have researched alliances, again 99% of the time they accept that as well. There seems to be a very low attitude threshold currently. e.g. at cumulative attitude 5 it turns friendly/green but accept friendship should be a much higher value like 50. Same to alliance. More turns need to be pass for friendships to 'ripen', right now it happens too fast. Interestingly though, this happens mostly between AI-human player. I see many AI-AI that are friendly to one another but don't declare formal friendship or alliance. So it favors the human player which is the opposite of what we want.
- Once you are in an alliance, you are basically "locked in" for the rest of the game. You can beat wipe out their religion, cause grievances, get a bunch of negative diplo modifiers. Say you have so many grievances that you have a net -40. This becomes irrelevant because as soon as the alliance expires and they are still friendly, at that very turn, 90% of the time you can go and re-declare friendship and alliance. AIs need to have some cool down or grace period after such agreements expire so their attitude value can adjust. My understanding is that the -8, +4 etc modifiers we see on the UI are the per turn change, and behind the scenes there is some hidden cumulative attitude value x. So during an alliance this x is locked at a high value like e.g. 50. Right after the alliance expires, even if you are supposed to get a -40 per turn, it doesn't matter because you can renew that very turn, before the values re-adjust.
- This one is rule-change need outside scope but will point out nevertheless: it is silly that you can declare friendships and alliances with everyone and even if the whole world is at war, you can stay "neutral" and not have to choose sides. In most games involving diplomacy, your allies or friends attacking one another would force you to choose sides - e.g. you either join war on one side and piss off the other, or cancel your alliance status with both and cause grievances to both. You shouldn't be allowed to stay neutral while still having an alliance pact.
Last edited:
Interesting AI test thread
xonespeed
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2019
- Messages
- 1
the AIs are keep spamming me 5 gold gifts... urgh that's annoying overtime.
dunno if the AI is just dumb or too smart...
"hei, I see you at war with that dude, maybe I can help you?"
"sure!"
*kill dude*
"hei you evil! we whole world hate you now!"
*but but.... I thought you agree that I help you in your war!! WTH!!*
dunno if the AI is just dumb or too smart...
"hei, I see you at war with that dude, maybe I can help you?"
"sure!"
*kill dude*
"hei you evil! we whole world hate you now!"
*but but.... I thought you agree that I help you in your war!! WTH!!*
Last edited:
Siesta Guru
Prince
Siesta Guru
Prince
Yeah, diplomacy is a major issue. I'd say the most major issue after unit micro. It's going to take dll access to change this though, there is almost no access to it in XML, and on lua side it's impossible to stop the AI from sending deals (though it's possible to have it send war declarations)
Besides what you mention, the most aggravating issue to me is how quickly aggressive AIs are willing to make peace. Humans luckily don't notice this too much because they don't spam peace requests every turn, but in AI vs AI wars peace is frequently declared while one player has a massive advantage and is about to take cities. If I could get rid of this, you'd be able to see full AI takeovers much more frequently, which would greatly increase the power of the bots
RohirrimElf
Emperor
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2010
- Messages
- 1,263
Is the AI+ mod support alive again?
MAXXXIM
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2019
- Messages
- 31
... red it is written with "incompatibly"
RohirrimElf
Emperor
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2010
- Messages
- 1,263
Noticed it as well. I started up a game once. It does not seem to matter i quess.
Currently playing hoi4 Italy campaign and will only test AI+ when i`m done with that game.
Siesta Guru
Prince
Ah, woops, thanks for letting me know. Seems I had to add a flag to make it register as compatible
Last edited:
