Best and worst AIs?

[Seraiel]

Hey, a lot of you posters are referring to some AI personality (this one will trade tech, this one will mass units, this one will backstab...).
I find myself in trouble with diplomacy and even after many games it seems I haven't found any consistent pattern for AI behaviours, except for some like Montezuma.
There's a great post about AI DOWs but it's not really summarized enough since it heavily relies on XML files and even Python code.

Do you have some great source for this info or is it all about gaming experience ?

Look for Kossins Signature, there you'll find a link to a summary about the XML-Files. It is more Info than the post about the AI DoWs but also very complex as it's not really translated. Very much can be guessed though.

 

[zig_zac]

I had some problems with Pacal.

He doesn't expand that much early game, but he does enough. Than he starts tech- and wonder whoring, yet he's not above tech trade, unit building or waging wars.

Good combination.

 

[ChanceDanger]

For reasons that are almost surely AI-based, Zara is always a monster when I'm on the map with him--if I can, I always make taking care of him a priority. Huayna, of course, is the same way. I also seem to have trouble with a lot of the Imperialistic leaders, but Catherine, Charlemagne, and especially Joao and Suleiman are the biggest trouble.

Also, Shaka.

Just want to strongly emphasize how much I agree with Zara being the toughest AI. Although there are ones that tech too fast (Mansa and Pacal), ones that will always declare anyway (Genghis and Monty) and ones that'll just try to mess up your Diplomacy with religion (Isabella and Justinian), but Zara is the only one that can really beat you. In the games I play, at least, he's usually the one with 1-2 vassals and built a solid religious bloc.

Also I won't deny Shaka as the most threatening warmonger.

 

[ahcos]

Shaka is an early game threat but techs so badly that his late game is a joke.

Actually he's the only full-out-warmonger that i know who constantly keeps up in tech, at least in the games i play. Really one of the strongest AIs.

 

[strijder20]

Shaka is an early game threat but techs so badly that his late game is a joke.

*Cough*

Spoiler :

He was teamed up with Pacal, though - but if he really techs that badly, the team wouldn't have Modern era units by 1750 AD, eh?

 

[D666]

Just want to strongly emphasize how much I agree with Zara being the toughest AI. Although there are ones that tech too fast (Mansa and Pacal), ones that will always declare anyway (Genghis and Monty) and ones that'll just try to mess up your Diplomacy with religion (Isabella and Justinian), but Zara is the only one that can really beat you. In the games I play, at least, he's usually the one with 1-2 vassals and built a solid religious bloc.

Also I won't deny Shaka as the most threatening warmonger.

Zara is tough in human or AI hands because he has a great pair of traits, the last game I won was with him. Justinian though, I don't really get. When I tried him I wasn't very impressed. His UB is lame (my cultural slider rarely goes above zero) and his UU is almost as good as a cuir so why not wait for the real thing?

 

[ChanceDanger]

Zara is tough in human or AI hands because he has a great pair of traits, the last game I won was with him. Justinian though, I don't really get. When I tried him I wasn't very impressed. His UB is lame (my cultural slider rarely goes above zero) and his UU is almost as good as a cuir so why not wait for the real thing?

Justinian should really just start whipping and drafting after music. The amount of happy you can get out of the Hippodrome is good enough that you should really keep 10% culture and just keep your whip/draft anger constant. In my mind that makes him like Montezuma as a leader that really get something out of abusing spiritual. The Cataphract is kinda lame (No FS immunity) but you can raise a lot of them in a hurry without a huge infrastructure expense.

 

[Tempesta13]

Some AI vs AI test games were played a couple years ago in this thread:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=353585

Didn't read through it again but I think the main conclusion (similar to this thread) was that the Creative trait makes for a stronger, more consistent AI.

 

[Mouthwash]

His UB is lame (my cultural slider rarely goes above zero) and his UU is almost as good as a cuir so why not wait for the real thing?

Seriously? Cataphracts beat any medieval unit and hold their own against rifles. Imo they're one of the best unique units in the game.

 

[strijder20]

Zara is tough in human or AI hands because he has a great pair of traits, the last game I won was with him. Justinian though, I don't really get. When I tried him I wasn't very impressed. His UB is lame (my cultural slider rarely goes above zero) and his UU is almost as good as a cuir so why not wait for the real thing?

If they would make a warrior replacement with 30 strength, would you also say 'Hey, that UU is almost as good as a mech infantry, so why not wait for the real thing?'
I think that pretty much demonstrates the two mistakes in that sentence.
-Cataphracts come earlier.
-Cataphracts are cheaper.

 

[The Oz-Man]

The big problem with Cataphracts for people, I think, is that if they want to war with horses they're usually doing a straight MT/Gunpowder beeline to get Cuirs, which are superior. Guilds requires a lot of techs like Machinery and Feudalism that a lot of people put off in the mid-game if they're going for mounted warfare. I think the fact that you can get Cataphracts earlier than Cuirs makes them a good target, but traipsing down the Machinery line means you could miss a lot of the nice things that are easy to pick up along the MT line (Music's free GA, the Great Library, the Parthenon, the Taj, etc.).

Basically, Justinian is one of the very, very few leaders with whom I like a Guilds beeline just because Cataphracts are really good.

 

[Seraiel]

Actually many people think Cataphracts are weak Units because they're not immune to Firststrikes and don't shoot over walls. What people forget is, that one can have them at least 500y earlier by bulbing with GSs.

 

[goldys_lackey]

Yep, Joao is probably the worst for me. Always eats up early resources and is a heavy spyer in later game. Sury-Mehmed-Zara-Ragnar-Shaka-Cathy-Willem-Justinian-Genghis-Greece-France-Stalin-Toku. India is best neighbor because he's a guaranteed shrine/missionary mill and no military threat. Next is probably Egypt because they're good trade partners and will build you wonders and sometimes shrines. Then Pacal, Saladin, Persia, Korea.

 

[vranasm]

Actually many people think Cataphracts are weak Units because they're not immune to Firststrikes and don't shoot over walls. What people forget is, that one can have them at least 500y earlier by bulbing with GSs.

actually that is not sufficient enough. AZ did some experiments with guild beelines in his videos and basically you get there on normal speed around early AD's and ironic enough some of the AI's touch engineering at the same time and honestly you can't battle castles with knights/cataphracts on normal speed.

At some maps guilds beeline could work, but you can't predict this at the start unless you pick AI's.

I saw some spectacular games from kossin touching Education at the time guilds would arrive and from edu it's not so far from MT.

 

[K.Murx]

I almost always pick up Flank II for all my mounted units - so my Cataphracts actually are immune to first strikes (helped by spiritual theocracy). Only bad thing remaining then is that they do not obsolete the wall/castle bonus, thus requiring some spies/siege. Makes them not good enough to conquer the world (mostly), but good enough to conquer one or two neighbours. Good enough for me...

Anyway, back to topic: Worst leader for me is semi-isolated Monty. Had a game where he started on the east end of a continent, with the next neighbour (Asoka, iirc) quite a long way off. And then Monty expands like rabbits in Australia because he has absolutely no problem with barb cities, and somewhat he also manages to tech well. So after I did a little cuirstomping of my continent, I discover a Monty with 20 cities (small map), who is 4 turns from rifling.

I really don't know what to do in such a situation (has happened twice to me). Only solution to non-obsolete Montystacks are nukes. However, to get to nukes you have to keep him from declaring on you which is kinda difficult (especially if you can not share his religion). If you bribe the other AIs on his continent, he'll just cap them, exacerbating the problem.

 

[Seraiel]

actually that is not sufficient enough. AZ did some experiments with guild beelines in his videos and basically you get there on normal speed around early AD's and ironic enough some of the AI's touch engineering at the same time and honestly you can't battle castles with knights/cataphracts on normal speed.

At some maps guilds beeline could work, but you can't predict this at the start unless you pick AI's.

I saw some spectacular games from kossin touching Education at the time guilds would arrive and from edu it's not so far from MT.

I wasn't talking about beelines. I was talking about Oracling Feudalism, bulbing MC + Machinery with GSs and self-researching Guilds. That'll give you Kataphracts long before AI has Castles. Takes good Commerce though.

I almost always pick up Flank II for all my mounted units - so my Cataphracts actually are immune to first strikes (helped by spiritual theocracy). Only bad thing remaining then is that they do not obsolete the wall/castle bonus, thus requiring some spies/siege. Makes them not good enough to conquer the world (mostly), but good enough to conquer one or two neighbours. Good enough for me...

If you fight against Castles, you're getting them too late.

 

[civvver]

Cataphracts are too specific of a strategy for me to really like them. It's fun once in a while. But justinian's traits stand on their own. Imp is a solid second tier trait (first tier being fin, org and ind), and many people swear by spiritual. The main downside to justin really is his starting techs blow.

 

[Framesticker]

Every AI that's eager to expand is a potential monster, so that immediately includes all Creative and most Imperialistic AIs - Catherine especially given the right circumstances is a monster. However it's really less about the AI and more about their start. I've once had a game where Toku had a double Gem + wet Corn start and took over his 4 civ continent before I'd gotten to there (it was a LHC I think look it up). Generally though, some I can mention from memory who are the cream of the pie are:

Gilgamesh
Hatty
Catherine
Darius
Shaka
Hammurabi
Zara (monster AI)

And really any of the suicidal warmongers (Toku/Monty/etc) given proper starts

 

[bobbyboy29]

I played one of those all AI test games, it was a lot of fun but dragged on a bit in the end. Basically, what I found was pretty similar to most. The top traits seem to be Cre and Imp, no surprise seeing as land=power and these are the two best land grabbing traits.

That having been said, those Cre and Imp civs are good at getting big and dominating but that doesn't necessarily translate to a win. Often they can't get dom as they are too friendly with the remaining civs to DOW them. They usually end up going for space which gives small vassal civs like Pacal and Gandhi a chance to beat them to culture. Often a weakling iv which vassals to a big brother early is the most dangerous combination.