Civ 6 AI Battle Royal

[Magil]

I think the Russian AI is just trolling everyone at this point. The viewers, Firaxis, and every other Civ they can.

 

[thecrazyscot]

Firaxis does need to be given a lot of credit for giving such extensive previews of the game so customers have a quite honest view of what the product is like. I'm still very excited for the game, but I do feel like I'm going into it knowing how poor the AI is and with tempered expectations.

 

[rpgalon]

My bet is Brazil winning this by a religious victory. Aztecs could conquer the world but do nothing.

 

[pietro1990]

we need a rifleman unit at the tech tree so you don't get screwed if you don't have niter. make it a early game industiral era tech and infantry late game industrial or early modern era..

So if you have niter use it in the renaissance era to conquer cities just like you used iron in the classical and medievel era.


and let warriors and pikemen upgrade to riflemen

 

[ExemplarVoss]

It pains me to say this, but I thought they were hosting this "battle royale" stream to showcase all the work they'd put in the AI.

It seems that has horribly backfired.

I'm not terrible surprised by that. Usually most of this is obscured from the player, just by the nature of the FOW. I expected the late game to be passive, but the late game kicked in way too early.
The impossibility of domination (and very unlikelihood of religion) doesn't surprise me at least.


Atomic era: 1775. It isn't just players that tech too fast.

 

[Vaclac]

Firaxis does need to be given a lot of credit for giving such extensive previews of the game so customers have a quite honest view of what the product is like. I'm still very excited for the game, but I do feel like I'm going into it knowing how poor the AI is and tempered expectations.

Yes, good for them for showing off the AI even though it is terrible. I expected, by the mere fact that they were showing it off, that it would be decent. At least they're giving everyone a chance to see before buying... I'm just surprised they went ahead with it, it almost makes me think they don't realize how bad it is.

 

[Josephias]

They're starting to explain it at least as it applies to warriors... that they can't be upgraded if you don't have strategic resources... which I think is just bad design - they should let them upgrade to something that doesn't require resources, like spearman to avoid this problem.

I'd rather consider the second part of the explanation he made. I didn't realized before the increasing maintenance costs for newer units. And that's trully a kind of stat (balance of GPT) the AI could overestimate... even if decreases its military score and puts it at risk.


BTW... Hey Argos DID build the campus in the 5 mountain tile! not all is lost

 

[Captain Fargle]

At least this is making it very clear what priorities need to be in the modding scene.

 

[Magil]

we need a rifleman unit at the tech tree so you don't get screwed if you don't have niter. make it a early game industiral era tech and infantry late game industrial or early modern era..

So if you have niter use it in the renaissance era to conquer cities just like you used iron in the classical and medievel era.


and let warriors and pikemen upgrade to riflemen

I feel like they could just have niter be required for siege units, don't need to put the requirement on muskets. Though I'd be fine with it if they had an alternative upgrade path for warriors... like in Civ IV. Seriously, Civ IV gets so many things right.

 

[pietro1990]

This russia Ai is just retarted settling a city in the middle of a other land mass you know there is other places on youre home continent right?

 

[bradeh]

I'm no expert on this but having to need strategic resources for 'core' units just seems like a flawed idea. Surely strategic resources would be better used for secondary and tertiary units, that way it doesn't impact the flow of the game.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

If the AI lacks a specific strategic resource, it should compensate by building other units that don't require something they lack.

 

[pietro1990]

I feel like they could just have niter be required for siege units, don't need to put the requirement on muskets. Though I'd be fine with it if they had an alternative upgrade path for warriors... like in Civ IV. Seriously, Civ IV gets so many things right.

Jep civ 4 lets you upgrade warriors to muskement and rifleman if you didn't had iron or copper.

and i agree bombards should only require niter resource

 

[ExemplarVoss]

This russia Ai is just retarted settling a city in the middle of a other land mass you know there is other places on youre home continent right?

Every single one of Russia's additional cities is wrong. And there was absolutely no reason for the first one to be wrong. They actually wandered past the natural wonder north of them, along the river to settle so far away. And then past Brazil and the Aztecs.

Hmm. Gotta love the Bazooka/Swordsman unit mix in multiple civs.

I love the constant questions about upgrading warriors. Twitch chat actually on the ball.

 

[Triarier]

Even if warriors need resources to upgrade, archers do not.
Still so many archers....

 

[Eramas]

1832AD, Brazil still with the Warriors.

 

[Magil]

The large amount of legions Rome had does suggest the AI would probably upgrade its warriors if it could.

 

[ScorpionTDC]

1832AD, Brazil still with the Warriors.

I think Brazil doesn't have any Iron, so they can't upgrade the warriors at all. The AI legitimately can't upgrade its warriors.

Hopefully this has a strategic balance mode

 

[pietro1990]

Again wit the problem of no niter no upgrades how hard is it to make 2 buttoms for upgrading like in civ 4 where you could upgrade a unit to riflemen even if you didn't had iron

 

[pietro1990]

I think Brazil doesn't have any Iron, so they can't upgrade the warriors at all.

You know the civ 5 AI like monetzuma olso had a lot of warriors but if he didn't had iron he just spammed other units like pikemen and after that he spammed other units like riflemen and muskemen