BTS: Anti Human Bias?

[Arkatakor]

I shelved Civ4 / Warlords months ago as I grew sick of game with its anti human bias and serious lack of inter AI wars - i'll elaborate below:

1) The severe lack of inter AI wars have 2 majors factors attributed to them:

i) same religion (the diplo bonuses for religions are totally exaggerated, I agree that they should exist but not to this ridiculous extent)
ii) The single and most undeniable and CRUCIAL fact to the lack of inter AI warefare and why AI's declare wars over the HUMAN player as opposed to each other is that AI's DO NOT DEMAND TRIBUTE TOWARDS EACH OTHER. This means that all AI's never have to suffer ANY diplomatic penalties for not submitting to each others demands, much unlike the human. This allways tips the scale against the human and as a result the human allways gets ganked unless he submits to their ridiculous demands.

2) Barbarians targeting the human player over the AI. This happens to such an extent that they will will literally walk thru the AI's territory and leave their developed land unscathed only to walk into YOUR territory and pillage every single square. I can live with this because its only an early game issue but it would be good to fix nonetheless.

Conclusion: I do not wish to adjust my settings (more aggro AI's, smaller maps) or download any mods for this purpose to alleviate the problem of lack of inter AI warfare. Firaxis can resolve the issues of anti human bias and lack of inter AI warfare by simply introducing a SINGLE concept: AI's demand tribute / favors towards each other as well as the human. This would literally solve ALL problems I have with the game. Thats all I would ask, a simple tweak as such.

So, back to the topic of this thread: has this issue been addressed in BTS? If people here confirm it has (which I SERIOUSLY doubt) then I will actually go and buy the expansion. Otherwise its a waste of my time as firaxis has not resolved this CORE and FUNDAMENTAL issue. They can make all the expansions they want but the game will suck until they resolve this, because lack of inter AI warfare just makes the game boring and too predictable. For those of you who do not know where I am coming from, simply play the previous versions of Civ (1,2 and 3); they did not suffer from lack of inter AI warfare.

 

[Empiremaker]

I've seen more AI wars in BtS. I have no quantitative results, but it is merely my opinion.

 

[Bhruic]

1) Still exists, but somewhat less a factor. You'll still get the negatives for the various demands the AI makes, but the AI has a tendancy to want to go to war more often (depending on the personality type), so they'll go to war with each other with more frequency.

2) Doesn't really exist. The barbarians have been altered pretty significantly - they often won't raze territory, and they don't seem to focus on the human if they do.

Bh

 

[omnimutant]

With regards to the barbarians, I see them quite often still walking past Enemy AI to come hunt me down. I think they took the barbs too far in BTS. They develop, over time, pretty far. I almost wonder if the AI treats them as another Nation?

AI does seem to war with each other a lot more now, but with AP it really changed a lot of things too. AP makes it much easier for the AI to "Legitimately" Gang up on you, if you happen to miss getting in the council.

Heres a slightly OT AP gripe as well watch out for this! The AI totally abused the AP system the last game I played. AP was newly formed and surprisingly I was not elected the leader, that distinction feel on Joao II. Joao II Declared On me as I had just built up a new city plot on the outskirts of my Civ(chopped a lot and got it pretty built up pretty fast). Apparently I was not as defended as I would have liked so he started pounding on me with a huge army. I knew I was going to lose that city, but had enough forces in other places to eventually win it back. All of a sudden the Vote comes up, to stop the war between us, which I thought was weird because he was the leader. Apparently it was a trick. Of course I voted yes, as I figured it would save my city from ultimate destruction. So what happens is, since it takes a full turn for it to go into effect, he piles on everything he had to nab the city just in time. He takes over the city and before I could react, the resolution finally passes. These means that now that he has just captured my city and I cannot try and take it back because, being a member of the AP, I am now forced beyond my control to accept this and cannot attack him. I'm never falling for that one again.

I wish there was an option to turn off the AP. The more games of BTS I play the more I really hate the AP more and more. If I don't use it, the AI gangs up on me through the AP process, if I do use it I end up getting hosed anyway, especially if I was the leader and a big push forth manges to put someone else in charge. I hate that I have no way what so ever to decide to not abide by the AP rules, aside from abstaining and even then it does not seem to matter much.

Let me also state that even if you decide you do not want in the AP it seems one of your cities will happen to randomly adopt one of the religions anyway that automatically qualify you for it, even if you don't want it. There should be an option to either, remove a religion from a city, or op out of all AP relations.

 

[GenocideBringer]

I don't know if the AI demands . .. .. .. . from one another in BTS. I CAN confirm, though, two things

1) Aggressive AI now works. It's no longer just a diplo modifier against the player...the militaristic AIs kick ass, and the peaceful ones have good sized armies to protect themselves with.

2) Intra-AI wars are quite damn common-as likely as any human-AI wars.

 

[Powerslave]

I don't understand why you refuse to use any mods. Regardless, if you had used the Better AI mod, you'd know what the new AI in BtS is like. Just download the latest version of Better AI, and you'll know instantly whether or not you'll like BtS.

To address another of your concerns, why don't you just give in to the AI's demands? You get a positive diplomatic modifier, if you do so. The AI can't get this modifier, much like how they can't get the negative modifier. If you always lose the game, because you get crushed by the AI's armies, why not just give up Alphabet anyways? In the worst case, it's not like the outcome is going to change.

Next, I would like to address the fact that you're a builder. Maybe you'd like SimCity 4 or Caesar 4 better than Civ 4. Seriously. Civ 4 is a war game, where you pump out units, wipe out all your enemies, and engage in minimal diplomacy or empire-building. The wonders exist only to tempt you into not building up a massive military.

Play SimCity 4 or Caesar 4, if you want to build an city or empire, respectively.

After saying all that, BtS is more "fair" than Warlords, but you'll get crushed mercilessly by any warlike AIs that see you're in last place for soldiers.

 

[kazapp]

If you get "ganked" by the AI, that's only because you didn't build a respectable army.

In BtS, the AI has been programmed to take advantage of military weakness even more than before.

So regardless of whether you're a builder or a warmonger, building an army must be your top priority. Unless you play at an ridicolously easy setting of course.

Many people who complain about being singled out by the AI have simply neglected their army.

 

[Slimthrull]

Conclusion: I do not wish to adjust my settings (more aggro AI's, smaller maps) or download any mods for this purpose to alleviate the problem of lack of inter AI warfare. Firaxis can resolve the issues of anti human bias and lack of inter AI warfare by simply introducing a SINGLE concept: AI's demand tribute / favors towards each other as well as the human. This would literally solve ALL problems I have with the game. Thats all I would ask, a simple tweak as such.

To rephrase: You refuse to play the game as it is. You want change. However, you also refuse to use any and all 3rd party tools to help you get what you want. You feel it is the maker's duty to make the game play exactly as you think it should.

I'll not pass judgement, but I do have a quick question: If a mod was out that gave you exactly what you want, why would you not use it? After all, you've basically wasted 50 bucks and a free mod would allow you to enjoy your purchase. Wouldn't it make sense to just do that instead of expecting (demanding?) that the maker "fix" the game?

Now to be honest, the game I'm playing now has been nothing but AI vs AI. I haven't been attacked once and its 1925 AD. I've seen 3 on 2 and 3 on 4 so far as well as at least 4 different one on one wars. Its been quite entertaining to stand back and get a culture win as the AI keeps hammering each other.

Granted, this is something of an anomaly. I'm usually attacked at least once per game, but I've often seen the AI going after another AI before trying to deal with me.

 

[Zetetic Apparat]

Anti-Human bias? Huh, this game is nothing but Xenophobic, not a single goddamn alien civilization or leader in the whole game.

 

[chopstyx]

ii) The single and most undeniable and CRUCIAL fact to the lack of inter AI warefare and why AI's declare wars over the HUMAN player as opposed to each other is that AI's DO NOT DEMAND TRIBUTE TOWARDS EACH OTHER. This means that all AI's never have to suffer ANY diplomatic penalties for not submitting to each others demands, much unlike the human. This allways tips the scale against the human and as a result the human allways gets ganked unless he submits to their ridiculous demands.

I'm enjoying BtS as I enjoyed Warlords and CIV before it, but I agree with the above - the diplomacy has long been a pain in the arse for me.

It annoys me how both Civs in an AI-AI war can ask you for assistance, you refuse them both, so you immediately have -1 from both civs! Then they'll ask you to stop trading with each other, another -1 from both sides. It's ridiculous. But when the human player is at war he cannot even ask the AI to go to war with someone if the option is redded out.

IMO nothing should be redded out ever. So even if you are completely dominating a civ and have demanded every tech from him, tough. If people think it's an explotation then they are welcome to play on more difficult levels I guess.

But as I said I am used to the fact that diplomacy is flawed, but i still love the game anyway.

 

[Soneji]

If you are on top, their demands are useless.

 

[Spearthrower]

To rephrase: You refuse to play the game as it is. You want change. However, you also refuse to use any and all 3rd party tools to help you get what you want. You feel it is the maker's duty to make the game play exactly as you think it should.

Succinct overview!

I never really had too much problem with the OP's remarks.... I saw enough AI to AI wars even in previous versions - although i can appreciate wanting a fairer playing field. BtS has definitely removed the throttle in that regard.

 

[RedRalph]

I think it varies form game sot game... I've had games when they never seem to fight and games when they never stop.

 

[Arlborn]

Next, I would like to address the fact that you're a builder. Maybe you'd like SimCity 4 or Caesar 4 better than Civ 4. Seriously. Civ 4 is a war game, where you pump out units, wipe out all your enemies, and engage in minimal diplomacy or empire-building. The wonders exist only to tempt you into not building up a massive military.

Play SimCity 4 or Caesar 4, if you want to build an city or empire, respectively.

After saying all that, BtS is more "fair" than Warlords, but you'll get crushed mercilessly by any warlike AIs that see you're in last place for soldiers.

No.

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

 

[Spearthrower]

Next, I would like to address the fact that you're a builder. Maybe you'd like SimCity 4 or Caesar 4 better than Civ 4. Seriously. Civ 4 is a war game, where you pump out units, wipe out all your enemies, and engage in minimal diplomacy or empire-building. The wonders exist only to tempt you into not building up a massive military.

Wholly and totally disagree with you.

Caesar 4 isn't an empire builder, it is a city builder.... Sim City 4 is too..... Civ is, and always has been, the best Empire building game on the market.... the war element is very weak compared to many other games. Maybe you should go and play M2:TW instead if war is all you play Civ for?

 

[Psyringe]

I always have lots of AI-vs-AI wars in my games. I've had games where one AI vassalized 5 others and controlled a whole large continent. I've had games where I wasn't even attacked once while the AIs were constantly DoWing each other. I've had games where at times I was the *only* leader *not* involved in a war while the world around me kind of exploded. I've had barbarians running right along the border of my weakly defended, rich cities to attack an AI city far away. I've had games where the AI was gifting me tech after tech. All of this was pre-BtS by the way.

In my opinion, people who complain about an anti-human bias just betray themselves because they have fallen into a playing style that makes them the militarily weakest nation on the board, which then *of course* gets ganked. An easy way to have more AI-vs-AI wars would be this:

1. Play on maps with many players. Global politics fall more easy into a stable pattern when there are less civilizations around.

2. Don't neglect your own defense, or at least forge a defensive pact with a strong partner. The AI will look for easy targets, so make sure that others are weaker then you.

3. Don't try to be everyone's friend. By doing so you will probably end up with lots of neighbours that are at least mildly pissed off, and no strong partner to deter those mildly pissed neighbours from ganging up on you. Instead, choose a side, choose your friends well, and really *do* work together with them. They will help you in return.

4. Keep playing a game even when you're not winning. Many AIs have a bias against a civ with superior score. Many players only play games when they are in the lead (or at least see a good chance to win), and mistake the anti-scoreleader bias for a anti-player bias.

All this worked already in Warlords, and (to an extent) in vanilla Civ4 as well. With BtS, the AI is even more likely to start AI-vs-AI wars, especially when you choose the "aggressive AI" option, which previously *did* introduce a diplomatic anti-player-bias, but now changes the AI's focus towards military instead of that.

 

[azaris]

It works both ways, giving in to demands for tribute improves your standings and is sometimes useful to make new friends from AI civs that are at Cautious but turn Pleased when you agree to gift them a tech. You just have to face up to the fact that they do demand tribute and not expect to rigidly refuse everything if you want to have any friends left in the end.

But the AIs now have an extra diplomatic penalty against each other: espionage. Since the AIs love to spam spies, they tend to rack up massive negative modifiers against each other for espionage. I've seen "-8 Your spy was caught causing trouble" lead to wars and trade embargos.

 

[afa2000]

OP is right. He is not complaining about wars, only about the diplomacy system. BTS is much better than warlords, but I think diplomacy is completely worthless now, once AIs often attack or sabotage even if they are pleased with you. I noticed also that some AIs get friendly with each other with +9 modifier and they are only pleased with me with +10 modifier. I'll post SS next time. Like OP said, they also never demand anything from each other.

 

[JavalTigar]

Might I suggest for the OP instead of Simcity or Ceasar: Knights of Honor.

You can find it on ebay. It has some of the best AI interaction I have ever seen. It is kinda like a cross between C&C, Civ & Total War. Very fun game.

 

[Zhahz]

The AIs fight more in BTS, they often take cities, and they even wipe each other out. It's way better in BTS than pre-BTS, IMO. The AIs aren't as unpredictable and randomly violent as, say, they were in Civ III, but they sure do fight a lot more and it's nice to see them sometimes go on a rampage of city taking.

I still think barbarians favor messing with the player and often ignore the AIs, but it's not quite as bad since they seem to be more random in what they do. That is, they often just wander around rather than homing in directly on you. Either way - it's not like it's that difficult to defend against something you know is going to happen, like barbarians.