BtS AI - Is it better?

[IronCrown]

Any AI combat move that looks like there is reason behind it would be encouraging

It's not that I have dominated every game... but really I have not seen a single military campaign against me that had any resemblance of 'intelligence'. Admittedly, most of my games have been quite peaceful.

 

[eric_]

I'm not sure if you read my little essay on the last page, but Justinian has made a handful of impressive moves that struck me as being very much like what a human would do...the most significant being when he sneaked a settler through a one-tile swath of open territory the turn before my border popped, dropped a town in the open space to which he made it, and then culture bombed, choking off a city I had recently captured from him. This rendered that city useless, forcing me back into war mode to re-secure my new assets. It was clear the copper, which the culture bomb reclaimed for him, was his goal then and when he sent the stack I described. I have two other of his cities, and he's completely ignored both.

So, not only are his attacks seemingly goal-oriented, so are many of his other moves. And, he seems to be holding a goal in mind over a very long period of time.

 

[jkp1187]

Seeing these kind of comments from players who are better than me really is puzzling. I've found BTS to be easier, if anything. Is it possible people are employing the wrong strategies that used to work on Warlords higher levels but somehow don't work on lower levels? that really makes no sense, but neither do some of these comments. I used to struggle on Noble/Prince but with BTS I am just dominating in my first few games. The tech pace is the reason. Also, the AI might bring large stacks now, but they just sit there! Are people actually getting attacked by these stacks or just assuming they will and playing defense? I've had large stacks march up to my cities then just sit outside. They don't even pillage.

I also wonder if some people are investing too much in espionage... if you neglect it on the slider, you can dominate techs and just run over everyone. yes, you might get harrassed a bit by enemy spies and you can't see what everyone is researching at first (although eventually enough courthouses will even allow this) but these are just not enough of a deterrant to overcome out-teching the AIs. they need to somehow balance this better if espionage is supposed to be more critical. it's a fun option but you can absolutely ignore it and win easily.

Llama, those are definitely worthwhile points. I never claimed to be good (much less better than you,) and I should note that my monarch days were on Warlords 1.61...I didn't get above Prince on Blake's Better AI (and I haven't really played the game much between March and the release of BtS). I think my problem has been not expanding/fighting enough wars in the early game. I also habitually overstuff the maps with civs (usually 10-11 civs on a standard-sized map,) so room for initial expansion is necessarily limited.

I have noticed the 'sitzkrieg stack' phenomenon in a recent game. It actually "sat" in a good position, since it was preventing me from advancing against another one of the AI's cities until I took action to destroy the stack. (Although the units in the stack made the fatal decision to attack once I moved a force of musketmen into a forest adjacent to the stack....Sitting Bull's cuirassires (sp?) got slaughtered without a single kill, IIRC.)

Which makes me think that the stacks are there to draw you out, force you to react to it. Not necessarily a bad thing, although the AI would've been advised to withdraw instead of attacking when I moved next to it.

And they were definitely pillaging before going into sitzkrieg mode.

 

[IronCrown]

Is 'sitzkrieg' a common term in the US or do you happen to know some german? Just curious

@eric: I read your post, but I'd like to see such things in my own games

 

[eric_]

@eric: I read your post, but I'd like to see such things in my own games

Well, of course. Hopefully it at least gives you hope, and hopefully my experiences weren't a series of interconnected flukes .

 

[snapjaw]

I think that the game AI may be worse than original Civ IV. I admit that I am no where near the player that most of you are since I normally just play on Warlord or Noble. I have won previously on Chieftan, Warlord and Noble with Culture, Diplomatic, Space and Military wins but have never had a win with more than 12k points, and I think I was no higher than the 3rd or 4th leader. But I played my first BTS game on Chieftan to check out the new features and won a Apostolic Palance Diplomatic win, with like 18k points in like 1788. For me that is way too early. I think I will have to play on a higher levels just to make the game as challenging as it once was.

I also feel that espionage is way too powerful. I poured about 10 - 20% in for most of the game and had the computer players bending to my will like nothing. Plus, by spreading my main religion and using espionage to force them to change to my religion I could control even more things through the Apostolic Palace. I am in my second game now and using the same tactics I look like I should win by 1500 or earlier. It is also so easy to make sure no war breaks out by making everyone who is a member of the Palace to sign an open borders treaty.

So, coming from an amature, it seems to have been dummed down.

 

[LlamaCat]

well it's interesting all the comments and maybe hard to compare our games until we've all played enough. maybe since certain leaders have more of a warmonger style, some are seeing better tactical moves, while others like myself are seeing the usual or worse dumbness because so far my AI opponents are more peaceful type of leaders. All I know is that I am not threatened by any cultural or space race or AP victories.... they just seem to sit there and slowly develop like they always did, waiting for me to make a move. even in the old game, I never once had an AI nuke me... I would love to just get in some situations like this and I was hoping BTS would bring that. seems that many others are experiencing this competitiveness by the AI in terms of trying to win the game or attack me. I'm jealous!

 

[eric_]

But I played my first BTS game on Chieftan to check out the new features and won a Apostolic Palance Diplomatic win, with like 18k points in like 1788.

Erm...that's not surprising at all on Cheiftan...plus, considering you get the AP at Theology that doesn't seem to early at all, really, for an AP Diplo win.

even in the old game, I never once had an AI nuke me...

Someone on another thread posted a game where the AI sent a HUGE naval stack with full transports and preempted the attack with tactical nukes. So, it's happening. Definitely I think some of it has to do with when/if you're perceived as a threat that can be neutralized militarily, or if they're doomed unless they manage to take a certain resource. I mean, sometimes it's best to not attack, and not doing so is an example of an intelligent AI.

 

[snapjaw]

Erm...that's not surprising at all on Cheiftan...plus, considering you get the AP at Theology that doesn't seem to early at all, really, for an AP Diplo win.


Yes, winning on Cheiftan in 1788 may not be surprising, but what is surprising is the score. Shouldn't a Cheiftan game be way scaled down from a Noble game or harder? A Cheiftan game win by even 1500 should not give a person such a huge normalized score where they would be considered at the top of the leaders like Ceasar Agustus. I just figured there would be a bigger penalty for playing on Cheiftan, but I guess not.

 

[·Imhotep·]

Someone on another thread posted a game where the AI sent a HUGE naval stack with full transports and preempted the attack with tactical nukes. So, it's happening. Definitely I think some of it has to do with when/if you're perceived as a threat that can be neutralized militarily, or if they're doomed unless they manage to take a certain resource. I mean, sometimes it's best to not attack, and not doing so is an example of an intelligent AI.

@Eric:

In the game I reported on the previous page Louis nuked Shaka 5 times in 1 turn - I just saw the screen shaking and first thought that it was me that was hit by nukes...

Imhotep

 

[IronCrown]

Time is a huge factor in computing the normalized score. My first BtS win was in 1625 AD, Prince level, diplo victory. Gave me a score of 57477
Next game was better though: Domination win on Emperor level in 1740 AD, normalized score: 91835

Score really doesn't mean a lot... for example, military wins will always give you higher score than peaceful victories.

 

[Antilogic]

Not necessarily--if you win early with the AP, you might be able to top a military victory with a diplo. I haven't been able to pull it off yet, but I'm guessing that's a strong peace win right there.

 

[Colossian]

BtS AI - Is it better?

Is better than Warlrods? - Yes, it is.
How much better? - Not significantly. But I'm sure it's better than Warlords.

 

[Footen]

I´ve found a few bugs in the AI that probably affect more then the thing I observed. If you place a privateer blockading enemy cities he will start building naval units to destroy the privateer, but if the produced unit is too weak to destroy the privateer, like a caravel or a trireme, he won´t attack with his newly built unit, instead he will try build another one of his strongest naval unit, which still can´t destroy my privateer, and then another and another.

Egypt had over 20 caravels swimming around my single privateer and he was still in the buissness of producing more caravels in all his coastal cities when portugal sank my privateer with a frigate.

I´m guessing land units do the same thing, they refuse to attack if they will lose too many units, the limit seems to be way too low atm, maybe even as low as "never attack if I´m guaranteed to lose 1 unit" or perhaps below 30% chance of winning, something like that obviously. Instead of attacking he will wait and build more weak units that he won´t attack with because he don´t like to lose any of them.

Also the AI doesn´t pillage anymore, one ship drifted around outside my city with 3 clams and 1 fish and he didn´t touch anyone of them. He didn´t blockade either, he probably doesn´t know the command for it.

 

[snarko]

Also the AI doesn´t pillage anymore, one ship drifted around outside my city with 3 clams and 1 fish and he didn´t touch anyone of them. He didn´t blockade either, he probably doesn´t know the command for it.

I've had the AI blockade one of my cities. Ofcourse, I had a superior ship nearby, so it didn't last long

 

[Seidrik_The_Gray]

I just had a game, where I was George Washington on a Terra Map, Emperor level. I was struggling to stay even in tech with the other Civs. Brennus was next door. (I should mention that Brennus has proven to be my most serious military challenge in several games...) There was a large lake to the SW of my lands with a narrow isthmus on the North end of the lake with Ocean to the North. Brennus actually had a city on a hill on that isthmus. I had cities on the East coast and to the NE of the large lake. At the South end of the large lake was a city with silver that Brennus controlled. I had all the land (a significant chunk worthy of eventually holding 15 cities) to the East of said lake. You could have drawn a vertical line through the lake, and I had everything to the East, he had allot of the land to the West, with the other AIs dividing the "old world continent." 1) Economically, I was suffering under the maintenance load of my cities. 2) Through clever traids and diplomacy, I had managed to stay a hair ahead of Brennus in Tech, but my economy was really hurting now...so my Army wasn't what it should have been perhaps. 3) We had just had a good size war between us, in which, I had managed to secure the silver city and keep Brennus out of the southern reaches of my unofficially claimed lands. 20 turns later, I am sending War Elephants, and Longbows and Crossbows from my rich cities far to the North to support my hold on the South. My reinforcements were just beginning to mass in the Silver city. First, Portugal...a civ FAR FAR FAR away to the West declares war on me with two stacks of swordsmen, Cats, and spears. The second stack is staggard two turns behind the first. Right after I handled the first stack, Brennus joins in, but with a stack of 8 Celtic Warriors, 4 Cats, and several Longbowmen. Brennus starts barraging my defenses down. 2nd stack of Portugese attackers suicides on my city, but for some reason one of their catapults decides to bombard my defenses...it is the only remaining portugese unit. My units are licking some minor wounds, but my walls are taking a pounding. My reinforcements are coming, but they will arive too late. Brennus gets my defenses to 0% and then attacks with everything. My units are toast. I lost 4 War Elephants, 2 Longbowmen, and 4 Axemen to his stack, only managing to kill a few Celtic Warriors and a couple cats.

Someone tell me that the AI doesn't cooperate, hmmm??? Without the portugese suicide attacks, I might have held on long enough for my reinforcements to arrive.

Additionally, I think the AI did a good job of rebuilding its military to surpass that which it had prior to our first war.

After they took the Silver city, I noticed Celtic Warriors, Longbowmen, and Cats streaming in following the first wave. I realized that I would lose several cities on the west of the lake...and decided that I had made a major blunder along the way and retired.

It all boils down to two things. 1) I took out the Dutch to my South vs. going after Brennus from the beginning. 2) I failed to sprawl quickly enough to hold the choke point.

Read my lips, Brennus and Monte are now both on my S list of Civs to take down ASAP.

 

[Seidrik_The_Gray]

I've had the AI blockade one of my cities. Ofcourse, I had a superior ship nearby, so it didn't last long

Not all civs are equal. Somewhere in the coding, there is now a personality code...perhaps a slider. The more aggressively slanted the Civ's slider, the more likely they are to pillage, etc...the more passive, the more likely they are to try to preserve your resources in the hopes that they will capture your city instead. Unfortunately, this slider I think governs too much of their behavior, leading to strange piles of units sitting around, waiting for more units to arrive prior to the assault and other oddities mentioned above.

Fact is, that I don't pillage unless I don't really want the city or feel that I lack the ability to take it any time soon or just want to denie them a resource (I have spies for that too though...)

Remember that the AI now also wants to win, and depending on their personality sliders (just a metephor for the millions of lines of code governing their tactics) they may feel that it's more advantagous in the long run to preserve the improvements.