Armies

[Gamewizard]

That should theoretically make the AI stronger, right? I mean, they always seem to use insta-heal instead of other promotions. Now if only they could diversify their pickings instead of always taking rough terrain promotions.

 

[Txurce]

If you're making a change for the sake of realism, which I believe is the main argument against instaheal, then why not make the promotion healing factor a fixed amount, rather than a percentage?

 

[Dunkah]

The question is does the AI know how to use it? Will they avoid using a promotion at all becuase their favorite insta-heal isn't available?

I think I would vote for a fixed amount given the choice.

I think this may make the AI weaker due to the fact they can't game the amount of hit points they have vs. potential enemies they are going to fight next turn like a human player can do. Thus losing out on the BIG heal in lieu of a promotion and a minor heal may end up as the demise of more AI units.

 

[Jaybe]

Since the AI would probably misuse the healing-with-promotion and the human would be prone to exploit it, ...
level the playing field by keeping promotions NON-deferrable.


ADDENDUM: In conjunction with non-deferred promotions, increase the healing to 6 or 8 hp.

 

[glider1]

Totally agree Jaybe, please if possible keep NON-deferrable promotions. Deferring is another exploit against the AI at this time while the AI is still struggling.
Cheers

 

[Thalassicus]

If you're making a change for the sake of realism, which I believe is the main argument against instaheal, then why not make the promotion healing factor a fixed amount, rather than a percentage?

The change is to avoid the jarring gameplay of jumpy health bars. The current method heals 20% of the maximum, which is 4hp. Difficulty doesn't concern me much here since we can adjust AI variables to compensate for any up or down in AI power.

 

[Txurce]

My concern was that a redlined unit heal as much as a yellow one., if you know what I mean.

 

[bwoww78]

from http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=10961871#post10961871 :
Observations (that go beyond research):

• AI units are often behind tech pace - which helps explain why I was winning anyway.
• I had two Piety happiness policies, didn't avoid growth, built no theaters - and had 40 happiness with 12 cities. It's too easy to stay happy in conquest.

I have noticed consistently in almost every game I play that the AI rarely upgrades when it can; even though they are well into the renaissance with excess strategic resources and plenty of gold reserves, they are still fielding warriors in some cases.

unless it's built as a unique unit, i don't see a lot of upgrading, an obvious hindrance to already poor AI vs human combat.

lastly, piety seems to be beating commerce as a warmongers best friend.

 

[Txurce]

lastly, piety seems to be beating commerce as a warmongers best friend.

Yes, I skipped Commerce this time around, and didn't need it at all. Professional Army is extremely powerful.

 

[Seek]

Yes, I skipped Commerce this time around, and didn't need it at all. Professional Army is extremely powerful.

Not to mention the Honor finisher! (Which is what I assumed you were referring to in the quoted post from the Research thread.)

 

[Txurce]

Not to mention the Honor finisher! (Which is what I assumed you were referring to in the quoted post from the Research thread.)

Yes, that's what I meant there. I was just focusing on how easy it is to get gold as long as you're killing. As with most policies, they're a much bigger boon for the human player because the AI has enough bonuses that the policies become excess to some degree (AI mediocrity aside).

 

[Thalassicus]

It's fantastic when strategies are not inexplicably tied with specific policies. Honor is obviously a given for any conquest game, but I'd say Liberty, Piety, and Commerce are all good options as additional investments. It makes sense from an immersion standpoint. Many wars have been about independence (liberty) ideology (piety) or resources (commerce).

 

[Seek]

Thal - I assume there's nothing that can be done re: getting the AI to upgrade their units more?

 

[Dunkah]

Guessing this has something to do with the AI won't spend its gold bug. Usually they have plenty of spare change to spend on unit upgrades...

Strange.

 

[Txurce]

The AI makes strange choices. For example, the Siam that was 15 techs ahead of me at one time (10 at the end) built a few fighters and sent three SAM's against my units... pretty effectively, naturally... but had no artillery and only light infantry (as well as a moderate amount of upgradeable units).

 

[Ahriman]

I notice the more peaceful AIs typically delay artillery a very, very long time. They get Light Infantry and Fighters.

The fighters are effective until I get AA guns, at which point the AI just suicides its fighters away.
I wish the AI would be more careful about throwing its fighters at units protected by AA guns.

 

[Txurce]

That makes sense, given that artillery isn't particularly useful against (invading) units.

I wonder if the fighter mechanic is (unfortunately) different than the land unit one.

 

[Ahriman]

That makes sense, given that artillery isn't particularly useful against (invading) units.

I wonder if the fighter mechanic is (unfortunately) different than the land unit one.

The problem is that it also means that these civs still often start wars, but without decent artillery aren't really able to take cities, with their big armies of light infantry.

I'm not sure if it is worth trying to change or fix, but it isn't necessarily optimal behavior.

 

[Txurce]

The problem is that it also means that these civs still often start wars, but without decent artillery aren't really able to take cities, with their big armies of light infantry.

They all use light infantry, it seems, and skirmishers and levies before that. They're supposed to, of course - it's the bread-and-butter unit - but the AI seems to do best when they blend it with more than the occasional specialized unit. I would argue for changing the balance, then occasionally see Russia, for example, build lots of knights and then Cossacks, and do very well with them.

 

[PxiePip]

Not sure if this is the right place to raise this, apologies if it isn't; based on the changes listed on Thal's website, I was under the impression that all embarked units have a combat strength now, and aren't necessarily immediately destroyed when moved onto, is that right? In a new game I just tested and my embarked polynesian warrior got instantly killed by a barbarian Galley. I wasn't sure if it was just because combat animations were disabled for that unit or something.